Requires law enforcement agencies to honor federal immigration detainers when safe, bars state and local governments from adopting sanctuary policies restricting cooperation with federal immigration authorities, and limits inmate citizenship inquiries to those tied to alleged state law violations.
relative to cooperation with federal immigration authorities.
HB511 would bar New Hampshire state and local governments from adopting "sanctuary" policies and require cooperation with federal immigration authorities. Supporters argue it strengthens public safety, upholds the rule of law, and protects taxpayers from costs tied to illegal immigration, while opponents argue it is unnecessary, would divert local police from their core duties, erode trust between law enforcement and immigrant communities, and raise civil-liberties and humanitarian concerns.
Supporters argue that sanctuary policies let people with criminal records evade law enforcement and that requiring cooperation with federal immigration authorities protects communities from crime.
“Sanctuary policies can create gaps in communication between local law enforcement and federal immigration authorities, which may allow individuals with serious criminal records to evade justice.”
— MATTHEW RHODES, Unity · #358218 — read full submission →
“Those public officials that allow this issue to go unchecked in their own towns and cities are putting their taxpayers and citizens at risk by ignoring the criminal alien problem.”
— Simon Berrio, Dalton · #344109 — read full submission →
“Sanctuary cities harbor criminals, creating a dangerous environment for U.S. citizens!”
— Lindsay Brown, Claremont · #342196 — read full submission →
Supporters contend that local sanctuary policies unlawfully conflict with federal immigration authority and that jurisdictions defying federal law should be prohibited from doing so.
“Thus, sanctuary cities/states is in fact an illegal concept which has its origins in political adversity and does great harm to American justice.”
— Lloyd Smrkovski, Claremont · #342455 — read full submission →
“Towns that refuse to assist federal efforts to deport these people are breaking the law and this bill clarifies that.”
— Michael Demars, Claremont · #345234 — read full submission →
Supporters argue that taxpayers should not have to fund services connected to illegal immigration and that tolerating it is unfair to those who immigrated through legal channels.
“It is wholly disrespectful of taxpayers and unfair to citizens in general to allow flagrant disregard of federal laws while expecting us to move over and pick up the tab.”
— Rachel Paluch, Alton · #342252 — read full submission →
“Allowing illegal immigrants is a slap in the face to all who have done the work for legal immigration, and no community should be able to circumvent the process.”
— Bill Limoges, Claremont · #342879 — read full submission →
Opponents argue the bill would damage trust between police and immigrant communities, making crime victims and witnesses afraid to come forward, which they say makes everyone less safe.
“Undocumented immigrants and their families (including people who are citizens or permanent residents) may be targeted by criminals and feel unable to report their victimization to law enforcement.”
— Jennifer Smith, PEMBROKE · #344535 — read full submission →
“It would make communities less safe by undermining trust in law enforcement and preventing community members from engaging with the police in cases where they are victims or witnesses of crime.”
— Jean Lewandowski, Nashua · #343720 — read full submission →
“I oppose HB 511-FN, relative to cooperation with federal immigration authorities for several reasons, one being it will erode community trust in law enforcement.”
— Margaret Hawthorn, Rindge · #355224 — read full submission →
Opponents frame immigration cooperation mandates as inconsistent with humanitarian, religious, or civic values, arguing NH should be a welcoming place that offers shelter rather than targeting immigrant communities.
“We were all once immigrants seeking a better home because of poverty, war, oppression,etc. What makes anyone better than another?”
— Arna Lewis, Portsmouth · #356755 — read full submission →
“Jesus was a refugee. His parents had to flee to Egypt until King Herod was no longer threatening his life.”
— Marian Baker, Hillsboro · #348000 — read full submission →
Opponents argue the bill would burden local law enforcement with unfunded federal immigration duties, diverting officers from public-safety responsibilities they are trained and paid for.
“Diversion of police staff: our local cops' most important job is to be lifesaving first responders.”
— Amelia Thompson, Newmarket · #355803 — read full submission →
“HB 511-FN transforms every local law enforcement officer into an unprepared and unpaid extension of the Federal government.”
— John Atherton, Dover · #344094 — read full submission →
Opponents argue there are no sanctuary cities in New Hampshire and that federal agents already have adequate resources to enforce civil immigration law, making a new state mandate redundant.
“A state law dictating the nature of such interactions when a crime has not occurred is both unnecessary and ill-advised.”
— Julianne Gadoury, Concord · #357856 — read full submission →
“This bill is unnecessary as there are no sanctuary cities in NH. Police departments do generally work with federal authorities.”
— Marjorie Corby, Manchester · #355856 — read full submission →
Some opponents argue the bill conflicts with civil-liberties protections and is unconstitutional, citing past lawsuits over civil immigration detention by local police.
“I know that the New Hampshire ACLU has brought several lawsuits challenging the civil detention of migrants by New Hampshire law enforcement personnel.”
— Rebecca Beaulieu, Dover · #344687 — read full submission →
“This bill would undermine the separation between the federal authority over immigration matters and the independence of local law enforcement.”
— Deborah Leavitt, Dover · #345326 — read full submission →
Opponents argue undocumented residents are largely law-abiding, hardworking, and economically important to businesses and communities, so targeting them would harm the local economy.
“Municipalities who offer sanctuary to law abiding, tax paying, economically contributing undocumented immigrants are protecting our communities from disastrous and misguided federal policies.”
— Joanne Foster, Portsmouth · #354377 — read full submission →
“More often than not, undocumented immigrants are law-abiding people who work hard, pay taxes, and enrich their communities.”
— Maria Marrero, Peterborough · #350675 — read full submission →
Opponents argue the bill would cause family separations and harm immigrant communities indiscriminately, without distinguishing between people with criminal records and law-abiding residents.
“Requiring Cooperation with federal immigration authorities separates families and causes undue harm.”
— Linda Haskins, Exeter · #350807 — read full submission →
“This so-called anti-sanctuary cities bill (one of three!) would require local law enforcement to target immigrant communities.”
— karolyn Campbell, Epsom · #348654 — read full submission →
Some opponents argue that state government should not override local control over policing and community policies, and that towns should decide such matters for themselves.
“I support local control in this issue and therefore oppose this legislation. Persecution of undocumented immigrants should not be a priority given all the other true crime and other problems that we have.”
— Jessica LaMontagne, Dover · #354240 — read full submission →
“Our country was founded on the principle of welcoming folks from other countries. Sanctuary policies are based on these same principles and are are aligned with my values. State and local governments should be allowed to enact them as they see fit.”
— Monica Staples, Nashua · #358128 — read full submission →
Generated by claude-sonnet-5 (claude code agent) on Jul 22, 2026. Quotes are verbatim excerpts, verified against the cited submission before publication. Summaries are AI interpretation of the record, not part of it.
This bill is xenophobic and unnecessary. Immigrants have always been part of this country and we are all human beings. It would do everyone in the State Houes well to read what’s emblazoned on the Statue of Liberty.
This bill will make the state unsafe for all of us.
It is our state right to stand up against injustice. This bill with prohibit us from doing what is right; protecting those who are in need of sanctuary and solace.
Dear Chairperson and Members of the Committee, I am writing to express my strong support for House Bill 511-FN, which promotes cooperation with federal immigration authorities and prohibits state and local governmental entities from adopting sanctuary policies. This legislation is a vital step toward ensuring that state and local law enforcement agencies can work effectively with federal immigration authorities to uphold the rule of law, protect public safety, and maintain the integrity of our immigration system. Why This Legislation Is Necessary Strengthening Public Safety Sanctuary policies can create gaps in communication between local law enforcement and federal immigration authorities, which may allow individuals with serious criminal records to evade justice. By prohibiting sanctuary policies, this bill ensures that law enforcement agencies can cooperate fully to address threats to public safety and prevent dangerous individuals from returning to our communities. Upholding the Rule of Law A consistent application of immigration laws is critical for maintaining public trust in the justice system. When local jurisdictions adopt sanctuary policies, they undermine federal law and create inconsistencies that can lead to confusion and inequitable enforcement. This bill reinforces the importance of aligning local actions with federal mandates. Encouraging Accountability By allowing the attorney general to take action against entities that violate this law, the bill introduces a mechanism for accountability. This ensures that all state and local entities adhere to their legal obligations and do not obstruct the enforcement of immigration laws. Providing Clear Guidelines The bill offers clear definitions and directives regarding cooperation with federal immigration authorities. This clarity benefits law enforcement agencies by eliminating uncertainty and providing a framework for lawful and effective collaboration. Protecting Vulnerable Populations While the bill ensures cooperation with federal immigration authorities, it explicitly protects victims and witnesses of crimes such as domestic violence, human trafficking, and other serious offenses. This provision demonstrates a balanced approach that prioritizes public safety while ensuring that vulnerable individuals feel safe coming forward to report crimes. Addressing Misconceptions Some may argue that cooperation with federal immigration authorities creates fear among immigrant communities. However, this bill includes specific exemptions to protect crime victims and witnesses, ensuring they are not deterred from seeking justice. The legislation also focuses on individuals who pose a threat to public safety, not those contributing positively to our communities. Fiscal Responsibility The fiscal note for this bill indicates that while there may be an initial cost associated with enforcement actions, these costs are proportional to the number of violations and can often be absorbed within existing budgets. Moreover, by addressing criminal activity more effectively, the bill could lead to long-term savings by reducing repeat offenses and improving public safety outcomes. Conclusion House Bill 511-FN is a critical measure to enhance public safety, uphold the rule of law, and ensure accountability across all levels of government. By fostering cooperation between state, local, and federal authorities, this bill ensures that our communities are safer and that our immigration laws are enforced fairly and consistently. I urge you to support the passage of this legislation and take a firm stand for the principles of law, safety, and accountability. Thank you for considering my testimony and for your service to the people of our state. Sincerely, Matthew Rhodes
Our country was founded on the principle of welcoming folks from other countries. Sanctuary policies are based on these same principles and are are aligned with my values. State and local governments should be allowed to enact them as they see fit.
Local police have enough to do taking care of communities without asking them to do the job of Immigration Officers. NH state laws clearly state that local police cannot do the job of Immigration.
It is important to note that there are significant federal resources already available to enforce civil immigration violations, including in New Hampshire. While the status of being undocumented is not a federal crime, anyone in the U.S. without lawful status is subject to removal through the federal civil immigration law system. New Hampshire has a full complement of federal law enforcement officers, including immigration enforcement agents, who regularly interact with their local and state law enforcement partners. A state law dictating the nature of such interactions when a crime has not occurred is both unnecessary and ill-advised. Many New Hampshire municipalities and law enforcement departments have created policies and standards that are meant to ensure the lawful and equal treatment of all residents, including those within immigrant communities. Of that, we should be proud and New Hampshire communities should be permitted to serve their constituents in ways that benefit all. These communities and their law enforcement departments should also be shielded from unwise state law mandates that expose them to civil liability. The proposed legislation is rooted in fear-mongering and anti-immigrant sentiment and would undermine principles of justice and equity in New Hampshire
Please pass this bill send them home.
We were all once immigrants seeking a better home because of poverty, war, oppression,etc. What makes anyone better than another? Have mercy, please! Do you really want to be known for separating children from parents and/or sending people back to a country they never knew, or even back to others who might kill them? C’mon, have a heart not a self-centered, misinformed view. Stand proud toward those that are contributing to our society! Please!
Sanctuary is good, not giving it is evil.
This bill appears to essentially gut sanctuary cities (how is a place a sanctuary when obligated to comply with law enforcement?), and with the recent executive order allowing ICE into churches, etc., more than ever NH needs to live by its motto "live free or die" and be a place of shelter for those who are most vulnerable. Shame on anyone who prefers to spend their legislative time hounding "the other" rather than addressing more pressing crises (infrastructure especially) in the state.
This bill is unnecessary as there are no sanctuary cities in NH. Police departments do generally work with federal authorities. They should not be asked to do the work assigned to ICE. Doing that would erode trust in the communities they are trying to serve. A bill like this just stirs anti-immigrant sentiment. Please consider a NO vote!
This bill requiring local law enforcement officers to assist ICE and Border Control agents would rip our community apart. I do not say this lightly. I've heard stories from so many people who were wrongfully detained it would crush your heart into tiny shards. I've been to Dachau. Did you know that Hitler took inspiration from the way the United States was treating indigenous people during the wild west period? He would be salivating at the chance to hear about family separation, ending birthright citizenship, and forcing local police to abandon their values and create chaos. And here is how this bill would affect me personally: 1. Diversion of police staff: our local cops' most important job is to be lifesaving first responders. If I get into a car accident, I don't want my law enforcement to be wasting time trying to imprisoning economic and political refugees for the crime of what, trying to survive and make life bearable for their children? 2. I don't want my taxes to go up because our state is too busy militarizing the border to lower the cost of living (the biggest issue on every single granite stater's agenda, and what we SHOULD be prioritizing) by the way the text of the bill says we would probably need to hire an attorney that costs $100,000!!! Think of how much the schools need that money. VOTE NO on HB 511
I oppose HB 511. New Hampshire needs to welcome and protect all people within our borders. This bill would target extremely vulnerable populations, have a negative impact on their safety, and erode both community trust in law enforcement and law enforcement's ability to both safeguard and protect the people living in their communities and enforce local and state law justly. Thank you.
I oppose HB 511-FN, relative to cooperation with federal immigration authorities for several reasons, one being it will erode community trust in law enforcement.
I oppose this bill.
I oppose HB415. This is a successful program that helps girls caught off guard (many are irregular at this age), or those who are poor. When I taught middle and high school I always had food for those who needed it and a student lunch ticket a hungry kid could borrow. I realize now I should have had menstrual products for the girls. I learned later that there were those who made pads and tampons "last" because they couldn't afford to change them when they should. That is unsanitary and can lead to infection. Menstrual products should be as available to students as toilet paper and paper towels are. I am surprised there are women supporting this bill. Please vote ITL.
The police and other authorities are in desperate need of a change in the public eye. This will cause undue cost to the taxpayers, some of who are those that will be targeted by this bill, instead of spending that money to provide initiatives that help to make the police be seen as community members that support a healthy state. It would be sad to see the hard work that has been done to change the negative perception to a more positive perception that the public has of the police in our state by instating this bill. It will undoubtedly cause harm not only to the reputation of the police but to individuals in our communities.
This bill would target immigrant communities and erode community trust in law enforcement
Municipalities who offer sanctuary to law abiding, tax paying, economically contributing undocumented immigrants are protecting our communities from disastrous and misguided federal policies. Businesses, and all of us who expect services in our community, rely on hard working immigrants. Stop wasting tax payer dollars targeting the innocent and focus on getting your members of Congress to pass a comprehensive immigration bill that will provide a fair, timely and safe process for current undocumented immigrants to come out of sanctuary to gain legal status, to protect our borders while also acknowledging the dire circumstances which drive many people to our borders, and most importantly, the irrefutable contributions that immigrants have made and continue to make in our country.
Sanctuary is a human response to oppressive and hateful actions by government or nongovernment actors. Cooperation with ICE policies that terrorize communities erodes public confidence. People seeking sanctuary often come from repressive and politically corrupt nations. We can't mimic these behaviours. We need to open our arms and hearts to people who have few other options. The residents of the cities targeted would not agree to these laws if put to a local vote. Big brother and big government are colluding for an America First agenda that is wholly un-American. Vote No!
We do not need this bill in NH. This bill is requiring state and local officials to hold people for alleged civil immigration violations that are not actually criminal in nature. Doing this is not only inconvenient and potentially harmful to the people being held, but is not the best use of law enforcement resources. As a tax payer, I do not want law enforcement's time being wasted on detaini g people that may or may not have committed anything.
I support local control in this issue and therefore oppose this legislation. Persecution of undocumented immigrants should not be a priority given all the other true crime and other problems that we have. I favor immigration reform and pathways to citizenship. We need workers.
I am opposed to this bill!
This bill seeks to limit the rights of citizens. Live Free or Die.