Just days before a brutal terrorist attack in Boulder, Colorado, Democratic Governor Jared Polis signed a sweeping bill expanding legal protections for illegal immigrants. The timing of the legislation has drawn criticism after an Egyptian national — who had overstayed his visa — allegedly carried out the violent assault during a pro-Israel rally.
On May 23, Governor Polis enacted legislation that removed the requirement for illegal immigrants to affirm intent to seek legal status to qualify for state benefits such as in-state tuition, driver’s licenses, and state-issued identification. The law also limits local law enforcement from detaining illegal immigrants beyond their release time to cooperate with ICE, previously permitted for up to six hours.
The measure extended further protections to illegal immigrants involved in criminal proceedings. It allows those convicted of class 3 misdemeanors to petition courts to reverse guilty pleas if they claim they weren’t informed about immigration consequences — previously only applicable to class 1 and 2 misdemeanors.
State agencies and public institutions, including schools and hospitals, are now restricted from sharing biometric data with federal immigration authorities unless presented with a federal warrant. Violators may face civil penalties up to $50,000.
Just over a week later, 45-year-old Mohamed Sabry Soliman allegedly attacked pro-Israel demonstrators in Boulder with Molotov cocktails and a makeshift flamethrower. Soliman, an Egyptian national, had overstayed his tourist visa and was granted a work permit under the Biden administration. The FBI is investigating the assault as a terrorist act.
Witnesses report that Soliman shouted “Free Palestine” during the attack. He later told investigators that he had been planning the assault for over a year and expressed a desire to “kill all Zionist people.”
The Department of Homeland Security has announced a review of its ICE tip line procedures following the incident. Federal law enforcement officials continue to investigate the case, which has reignited debate over state-level sanctuary-style policies and federal immigration enforcement.
