Democratic mayors of four cities with sanctuary policies to protect migrants are consulting with advisers, hiring lawyers and preparing to redact documents ahead of a grilling by House Republicans — hoping to avoid the kind of Capitol Hill spectacle that embarrassed three Ivy League presidents a little over a year ago.
These mayors are also furiously conferring with anyone they know who can offer insight and counsel about how to handle the kind of scrutiny that resulted in the ouster of University of Pennsylvania President Liz Magill following the late 2023 congressional hearing on antisemitism at elite colleges.
Just as Republicans hammered Magill and others for what they saw as condoning alleged threats to Jewish students and faculty, Republican members of Congress will on Wednesday ask the mayors of New York, Chicago, Boston and Denver to defend their more permissive immigration policies against high-profile, if isolated, episodes of violent crime by undocumented immigrants.
“I just want to make sure that people understand that [this is] a city that has been established by immigrants and migrants who were formerly enslaved,” Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson told reporters about the message he hopes to relay to Congress. “It’s the global capital of the world, and we’re going to continue to show up at our very best.”
Republicans on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee are getting ready for this moment, too, especially Chair James Comer, who sat on the Education and Workforce panel that questioned Magill and other university presidents. He said in an interview he was impressed by how Rep. Elise Stefanik, the former education committee chair who President Donald Trump nominated to be U.N. ambassador, ran those proceedings.
In a sign of how seriously the Kentucky Republican is taking his own preparations to produce a similar, politically explosive event, he and his members last week sat down to discuss immigration policy with Stephen Miller, the White House deputy chief of staff and the architect of some of Trump’s most aggressive efforts to curb illegal immigration, according to a person granted anonymity to describe a private meeting.
“We expect accountability — we expect the mandate that President Trump was given on the border to be implemented, and hopefully there won’t be any obstruction or opposition to the law,” Comer, who may run for governor in 2027, said in an interview. “If the mayors are protecting people who are here illegally, then they are breaking the law.”
The ramp-up on all sides speaks to the high political stakes of the upcoming hearing, both for the policies at the center of the debate and the political futures of the committee chair and the four mayors: Johnson, Eric Adams of New York, Michelle Wu of Boston and Mike Johnston of Denver. All four cities have struggled to shelter and support the influx of migrants from the Southern border.
Adams likely has the most at stake: The Trump Department of Justice recently called for the mayor’s criminal bribery and fraud case to be dismissed, citing his cooperation on immigration enforcement. (Adams continues to deny the charges.) Shortly thereafter, Adams met with border czar Tom Homan and announced he’s drafting an executive order allowing ICE agents back into the city’s Rikers Island jail complex.
Adams has rejected criticism he’s beholden to the Trump administration and says he has his constituents’ best interests at heart. Still, observers expect Adams — a former New York Police Department captain — will be treated differently than the other mayors, with Comer contending the New Yorker’s perspective is unique given his cooperation with the administration.
“He was one of the first blue city mayors that was representing a sanctuary city that said, ‘wait, we cannot handle anymore. This is a drain on our resources,’” Comer said of Adams. “I think that that’s what makes him a good witness.”
Adams will seek to strike a balance before the committee, according to his spokesperson Kayla Mamelak Altus. While the mayor believes in the spirit of sanctuary laws, he also thinks those laws currently go too far. He is expected to testify that immigrants are crucial to his city’s success — but also that the “long-broken immigration system” should be fixed, law-abiding New Yorkers should be protected and violent criminals should be targeted.
The mayor has been meeting daily with his legal, intergovernmental and communications teams in preparation for Wednesday’s hearing, Mamelak Altus said. And his deputy mayor for intergovernmental affairs, Tiffany Raspberry, is the liaison to both the Oversight Committee members and the other mayors’ teams.
At the same time, the contrast between Adams and the other Democratic mayors could pose a political risk for the three more progressive city leaders — including Johnston of Denver, who said in November he was willing to go to jail over his opposition to Trump’s mass deportation plans.
In preparation for the hearing, Johnston has conferred with Sen. Michael Bennet and Rep. Diana DeGette — both Colorado Democrats — for pointers on appearing before Congress. He also has contracted the Washington-based attorney Dana Remus, a former White House counsel for President Joe Biden.
The city of Denver is preparing to gather documents requested by federal officials, and it is expected to redact information so the hundreds of city employees who have been involved in the sanctuary city work are not unnecessarily targeted for doing their jobs.
Meanwhile, an attorney close to the Chicago mayor’s office hopes to see Johnson stick to his talking points as Republicans may try to pit Adams as “the good compliant mayor and Johnson as the deviant.” The attorney was granted anonymity to discuss internal planning.
Johnson has connected with former Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot, a former federal prosecutor who has experience working with GOP elected officials — including representing congressional Republicans in two high-profile redistricting cases. He is also working with the city’s corporate counsel, Mary Richardson-Lowry, on how to respond to legally sensitive questions, and the city has contracted with outside counsel.
Wu, the Boston mayor, has received guidance in advance of the hearing from Rep. Stephen Lynch, a fellow Massachusetts Democrat who sits on the Oversight Committee. He called after Comer first extended the invitation for Wu and others to testify, Lynch said in an interview with a local station.
The story Wu is likely to tell is that of her city’s plummeting murder rate. Boston earned national attention for the drop in homicides last year, and the number of shooting victims and instances of gunfire have also ticked down of late. That has prompted Wu to regularly tout Boston as “the safest major city in the country.”
Wednesday will reveal whether the mayors’ preparations are a match for Comer, whose team has been building anticipation for the big event. Last week, Oversight Committee Republicans released a dramatized video, akin to a movie trailer, previewing the hearing, depicting a Constitution burning to reveal the faces of the four Democratic mayors. Ominous music plays, and Comer vows to cut federal funding for those who fail to cooperate with U.S. law.
But in a recent interview, Comer maintained that creating a made-for-TV moment was not his goal. He was there when Stefanik asked those university presidents whether calling for the genocide of Jews violated their codes of conduct — a “substantive question,” Comer recalled, adding that rarely do substantive questions go viral.
“First of all, our goal is to get the truth, we believe in transparency,” Comer said. “My job isn’t entertainment. My job is to get the truth to the American people.”
