Congressional Republicans on Thursday questioned three Democratic governors about their states’ immigration policies, amplifying a partisan clash as President Trump challenges California officials and anti-deportation protests spread across the country.
The political divide was on display from the start, even before any of the three governors — Tim Walz of Minnesota, JB Pritzker of Illinois and Kathy Hochul of New York — had been sworn in to testify before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
Representative James R. Comer, the Kentucky Republican who leads the committee, began by invoking the death of a young woman who the authorities said was killed by an undocumented immigrant who was driving drunk, framing the immigration debate as one about lawlessness and criminality. Behind him were photos of undocumented immigrants who officials in Minnesota, Illinois and New York have accused of violent crimes.
Representative Stephen Lynch of Massachusetts, temporarily the top Democrat on the committee, opened his remarks by pointing to Mr. Trump’s deployment of troops to Los Angeles and his sweeping deportation campaign. At one point, he likened the federal immigration enforcement to the Gestapo, saying that “The Trump administration is putting extremism, cruelty and chaos over protecting kids and families.”
The hearing was scheduled long before the unrest in Los Angeles, which began last week with protests over workplace raids and escalated after the Trump administration sent Marines and National Guard troops to the city.
But House Republicans pointed to the scenes of violent clashes in California and elsewhere as they sought to vilify Democratic officials over immigration policies that Mr. Trump and his allies in Congress claim shield criminals.
Democrats have remained divided over their party’s stance on immigration enforcement; some recent polls have shown them to be politically vulnerable on the issue compared to Republicans. But they are united in their efforts to cast Mr. Trump’s large-scale immigration crackdown and his response to the California protests as an abuse of presidential power and a violation of the Constitution.
Thursday’s hearing reflects a larger Republican effort to harness voters’ anxieties over immigration and crime for political gains. During his campaign last year, Mr. Trump broadly depicted undocumented immigrants as violent and dangerous, blaming Democrats for encouraging a “migrant crime wave” that was contradicted by statistics.
Earlier this year, the president issued executive orders targeting so-called sanctuary cities, jurisdictions that limit their cooperation with federal immigration authorities or have policies explicitly intended to protect undocumented immigrants against detention or deportation. One order directs the withholding of federal funds from cities and counties that do not cooperate with federal immigration enforcement efforts.
Republicans in Congress also have advanced bills that have taken aim at those states and localities. And Mr. Comer has promised to use his committee’s investigatory powers to explore the effects of sanctuary laws.
The committee is the House’s principal investigative panel and one of its most confrontational, stacked with vocal ideologues. The tense and sometimes theatrical hearings often re-emerge as viral moments delivered to supporters on social media.
Mr. Comer’s summoning of the three Democratic governors seemed designed to generate maximum political impact, even if they can avoid a gaffe. Mr. Walz, who is weighing a re-election campaign, was the Democratic vice-presidential nominee last year and one of his party’s highest-profile representatives fighting Mr. Trump. Both he and Mr. Pritzker, who has called on Democrats to adopt a more aggressive approach to Mr. Trump, are among those floated as potential 2028 presidential contenders.
Ms. Hochul has sought to strike a more moderate posture. After initially clashing with Mr. Trump over congestion pricing, the brash president and unassuming governor have built something of a rapport. In just the past month, Mr. Trump reversed course to approve a wind farm crucial to the state’s climate goals, and Ms. Hochul signaled openness to a new gas pipeline that the president has pushed for.
But the relationship remains a high-wire act for Ms. Hochul, who is seeking re-election next year. Two House Republicans, Representatives Mike Lawler and Elise Stefanik, are weighing running against her. Both were expected to speak during Thursday’s hearing and to criticize Ms. Hochul’s stance on immigration for years.
Ms. Hochul has defended New York’s immigration laws, which prohibit arrests in state buildings and require agents to seek judicial warrants before detaining residents.
Even so, it could be difficult for House Republicans to portray her as an open-borders radical. A centrist from Buffalo, Ms. Hochul garnered some of the first headlines of her career back in 2007, when as a county clerk she refused to provide driver’s licenses to undocumented immigrants. And while her stance has shifted — her prepared testimony for the committee include a line on the importance of everyone being able to obtain a license — she has remained, rhetorically at least, more open to working with federal immigration officials than other Democrats in her state.
“Someone breaks the law, I’ll be the first one to call up I.C.E. and say, ‘Get them out of here,’” she told reporters late last year.
Even so, in her prepared testimony, Ms. Hochul invoked New York’s storied history as a city of immigrants and her family’s migration from Ireland to put forward her own vision for immigration reform, prioritizing work authorization.
“Let them work; let them contribute,” she wrote. “Let them chase the American dream — just like my grandparents, and many of yours.”
Mr. Pritzker has sought to turn Illinois into a “firewall” against Mr. Trump’s deportation efforts, signing some of the nation’s most robust legislation in defiance of federal immigration enforcement. Where New York law only restricts officials from sharing information with federal agents, giving localities some discretion, Illinois forbids local authorities from engaging with immigration enforcement actions.
Mr. Pritzker on Thursday said that Illinois would “not participate in abuses of power” or “violate court orders” at the behest of federal immigration officials. He also criticized Mr. Trump for ignoring local officials when he deployed troops to Los Angeles.
Mr. Walz maintained that Minnesota is not a “sanctuary state,” noting that its legislature has not passed any laws designed to protect undocumented people. But he said that the state respects city and county decisions on how much to coordinate with federal immigration officials.
Michael Gold covers Congress for The Times, with a focus on immigration policy and congressional oversight.
Grace Ashford covers New York government and politics for The Times.
The post Republicans in Congress Grill Democratic Governors on Immigration appeared first on New York Times.
