House Republicans cast the mayors of four major American cities as willful impediments to President Trump’s mass deportation agenda during a tense congressional hearing on Wednesday. But in doing so, Republicans also gave the leaders a national platform to passionately defend their cities’ policies and immigrants.
The hearing of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, one of the most contentious on Capitol Hill, lasted nearly six hours and grew increasingly confrontational. Republicans accused the Democratic leaders of New York, Chicago, Denver and Boston of sheltering dangerous criminals, while several of the mayors pointed to inaction in Washington.
Many Republicans demanded yes or no answers to questions that were intended to force the mayors into stumbles that could hurt them with their constituents — and perhaps create a viral moment for members of Congress trying to bolster their reputations as standard bearers for the Trump administration.
Here are five takeaways from the hearing:
Republicans tried to pin migrant crimes on ‘sanctuary city’ policies.
House Republicans argued that officials in so-called sanctuary cities have refused to fully cooperate with federal immigration enforcement efforts, making them at least partly responsible when migrants commit violent crimes.
From the start of the hearing, the committee chairman, Representative James Comer of Kentucky, and many other Republicans, referred to cases of rape or murder involving unauthorized immigrants and asked each mayor if he or she would have handed the suspect over to Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
The mayors responded that they did not harbor criminals and said they would turn over any suspect if presented with a criminal warrant. They said their policies did not prevent cooperation with federal agents — but also argued that federal law did not require local officials to enforce national immigration policies.
Several Republicans suggested that the mayors might be guilty of obstruction of justice and that the attorney general should investigate them. “We’ve got a problem here when we decide there are some laws that we obey and some laws that we won’t,” said Representative Gary Palmer, Republican of Alabama.
Mayors strongly defended their policies and their cities’ public safety records.
The mayors seemed prepared for the barrage of hostile questions. They tried to explain the details of immigration enforcement policy and what, exactly, cities and states are required to do under federal and state laws — which is not everything Republicans were demanding of them.
They rejected criticism that their cities had devolved into dangerous places because of growing immigrant populations, and cited declining crime rates. They said their policies engendered trust with people in migrant communities, allowing them to feel comfortable cooperating with the local police.
“We do not harbor criminals,” Mayor Brandon Johnson of Chicago said. “We arrest them.”
At times, the mayors appeared eager to draw a contrast with House Republicans, portraying themselves as protectors of public health, safety and education whose jobs have been made more difficult by Congress and the Trump administration.
“If you wanted to make us safe, pass gun reforms,” Mayor Michelle Wu of Boston said. “Stop cutting Medicaid. Stop cutting cancer research. Stop cutting funds for veterans.”
The hearing spotlighted the continuing partisan divide over immigration.
Everyone in the hearing appeared to agree that unrestrained immigration poses a serious challenge to American cities.
But Republicans and Democrats repeatedly spoke past each other and used words that revealed a fundamental divide over how they approached the issue — “illegal alien” versus “asylum seeker,” “sanctuary city” versus “welcoming city.”
The result, in a congressional committee known for its spectacle and combativeness, were clipped exchanges where the lines of questioning were clearly intended more as performance to prove a political point, than efforts to obtain a deeper understanding of the problem.
Democrats invoked faith and Republicans invoked Trump as their guides on immigration.
Democrats have not always seemed comfortable talking about matters of faith. Yet several mayors mentioned God and the Bible to explain why they think about immigration as a moral issue. Their invocations were made more striking by the ash crosses on many foreheads for Ash Wednesday.
“As Scripture says, ‘For I was hungry, and you gave me something to eat,’” Mayor Mike Johnston of Denver said, citing the Gospel of Matthew. “‘I was thirsty, and you gave me something to drink. I was a stranger, and you invited me in.’”
Republicans, on the other hand, cited Mr. Trump as their guiding force, portraying him as the only change needed in the country to change immigration enforcement.
“We don’t need to pass laws,” Representative Eric Burlison of Missouri told Ms. Wu when she pleaded with members of the panel to pass comprehensive immigration reform (a bipartisan effort was scuttled during the presidential campaign at Mr. Trump’s urging). “All we need is a new president.”
Mayor Eric Adams faced heavy criticism from fellow Democrats.
Eric Adams of New York, the mayor of America’s largest city, was largely spared intense Republican criticism on immigration policies, and in some cases, was even praised by members of the opposite party — a strange turnaround for the leader of a community that has been vastly affected by the influx of immigrants.
Mr. Adams instead drew heavy scrutiny from House Democrats, who repeatedly asked whether he agreed to help the Trump administration crackdown on immigration in order to have federal corruption charges against him dismissed, something Mr. Adams has denied.
As the hearing dragged on, the mayor grew fatigued and testy about the inquiries and calls for his resignation from fellow Democrats.
“It appears as though we’re asking the same questions over and over and over again,” he told Representative Jasmine Crockett, Democrat of Texas. “My comments are not going to change. No quid pro quo, no agreement. I did nothing wrong.”
