Helena Responds to Attorney General’s Immigration Resolution Investigation
The city of Helena has formally addressed Attorney General Austin Knudsen’s investigation into allegations of state law violations tied to its immigration resolution. In a recent letter, the city requested guidance on whether proposed amendments would adequately address his concerns.
In an April 1 letter, Helena clarified its actions and intentions behind the resolution, differentiating them from the key points raised by Knudsen, which were outlined in cease-and-desist letters sent from his office.
According to Boone Carlberg, the law firm representing Helena, “We strongly disagree that Helena Resolution No. 21062 violates the Montana Sanctuary Jurisdiction Statutes or any applicable law.” The letter emphasized that the resolution aims to safeguard city employees from being coerced into performing unauthorized duties for federal authorities while also protecting the dignity of Helena’s immigrant community in line with existing laws.
The original resolution was passed in January amid public outcry over widespread arrests of undocumented immigrants in the state, which raised concerns about the practices employed by federal immigration enforcement agencies.
Knudsen, a former Republican legislator turned state attorney general, asserted in a press conference earlier this year that the city had breached a law prohibiting sanctuary cities in Montana by enacting the resolution. This declaration prompted a formal investigation. Ultimately, Helena rescinded the resolution during a special six-hour town meeting, attended by around 200 citizens at the Civic Center.
Should the attorney general’s office have found the resolution unlawful, Helena risked losing millions in grant funding. However, the resolution also touches on issues of local governance, which has caused frustration among city officials. In light of this, Helena officials announced plans to revise the resolution, this time incorporating feedback from Knudsen’s office.
In its response, Helena disputed Knudsen’s interpretation, arguing that it misrepresents both the resolution’s intent and its explicit language. The city’s letter systematically addressed Knudsen’s points, particularly his claim that the resolution directly contravenes the Sanctuary Cities Act.
The city pointed out that Knudsen’s citation was incomplete, noting that it omitted vital language allowing for information-sharing with federal law enforcement as dictated by law. Helena’s now-cancelled resolution indicated that police would not detain individuals solely based on their immigration status.
Montana law mandates that officers must act on requests for immigration detainers for individuals already in custody. Helena clarified that its resolution does not prevent lawful detention but stipulates that arrests cannot be made merely on the basis of an individual’s immigration status.
Additionally, Knudsen’s cease-and-desist letter suggested that the resolution could create a chilling effect on local law enforcement’s cooperation with federal agencies. In response, Helena asserted that such claims infringe upon the free speech rights of local elected officials.
Although the letter was briefly discussed at an April 6 meeting of the Helena City Commission, officials noted that a response from the attorney general’s office has not yet been received. The revised draft resolution submitted to Knudsen’s office includes measures to support ongoing collaborations between the Helena Police Department and federal law enforcement agencies, indicative of the city’s commitment to maintaining safety.
The new resolution has also moderated language concerning federal employee accountability, addressing past public concerns. It explicitly states that Helena does not identify as a “sanctuary city” and does not intend to become one through this resolution.
Helena’s letter submitted to Knudsen requested a 14-day period for a formal response. In a separate case, Knudsen has urged Gallatin County to revoke policies he claims obstruct cooperation with Immigration and Customs Enforcement. In turn, Gallatin County clarified that there are no such policies in place limiting collaboration with federal authorities.
