SB1991 creates the Victim Centered Approach Pilot Program Act and directs the Lake County State’s Attorney to establish a five-year pilot program to provide free immigration-related legal representation and counseling to certain noncitizen victims of violent crimes. The program is intended to help eligible victims file immigration remedies before U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, and the bill specifies that the office should use any funding provided to assist 50 noncitizen victims per year for five years. To qualify, a person must be a noncitizen victim who has never been placed in removal proceedings, must have suffered a violent crime in Lake County, and must not be barred from the immigration remedy sought.
The bill also amends the Counties Code to clarify when a State’s Attorney in a county with more than 500,000 residents may act without fee or appointment as an attorney for a noncitizen victim in an immigration case. Under the bill, that authority applies only when the victimization occurred within the county served by the State’s Attorney and the victim is located within that county’s geographic boundaries. In practical terms, the measure would expand and formalize a limited local government role in immigration-related victim representation, while tying that authority to county-based victimization and residency/location requirements.
Impact
SB1991 would create a new state pilot program funded through the Lake County State’s Attorney’s office to provide immigration legal services to a defined group of crime victims, and it would amend Section 3-9005 of the Counties Code to expressly authorize certain State’s Attorneys to represent noncitizen victims in immigration matters under limited circumstances. The bill would not broadly change immigration law, but it would affect how local prosecutors may use their authority and resources to assist victims seeking immigration remedies, and it would establish eligibility rules, service limits, and a five-year duration for the pilot.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee testimony or votes, the overall sentiment appears supportive and victim-centered. The findings section frames the measure as a response to barriers faced by noncitizen victims who cannot afford counsel and need help pursuing immigration relief after violent crime. The bill’s structure suggests an intent to provide targeted assistance rather than a broad policy shift, and there is no available record here of formal opposition or amendment debate.
Contention
The main potential points of contention are likely to be the use of a county State’s Attorney’s office for immigration representation, the focus on noncitizen victims, and the allocation of public resources to a limited pilot serving 50 people per year in one county. Supporters would emphasize access to counsel, victim safety, and stabilization after violent crime, while critics might question whether a prosecutor’s office should provide immigration legal services, whether the program should be funded by the state or county, and whether the geographic and eligibility restrictions are too narrow or too broad. Because no committee transcripts or votes are provided, these concerns are inferred from the bill’s design rather than documented debate.