Pushing an End to Sanctuary Cities: Will it Happen?

Raina Bhatt
{"title":"Pushing an End to Sanctuary Cities: Will it Happen?","authors":"Raina Bhatt","doi":"10.36643/mjrl.22.1.pushing","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Sanctuary jurisdictions refer to city, town, and state governments (collectively, localities or local governments) that have passed provisions to limit their enforcement of federal immigration laws. Such local governments execute limiting provisions in order to bolster community cooperation, prevent racial discrimination, focus on local priorities for enforcement, or even to a show a local policy that differs from federal policy. The provisions are in the forms of executive orders, municipal ordinances, and state resolutions. Additionally, the scope of the provisions vary by locality: some prohibit law enforcement from asking about immigration status, while others prohibit the use of state resources to enforce federal immigration laws. Despite these variations, such local provisions intend to stifle cooperation with the federal government to adopt a more inclusionary local enforcement policy. Immigration policy is unanimously understood as a federal power, suggesting that federal immigration laws preempt the local governments’ provisions. Such preemption challenges have been brought to court, yet sanctuary cities remain largely untouched.\n\nThe July 2015 murder of Kate Steinle in San Francisco, CA, renewed political discourse on the topic. Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez, an undocumented immigrant who had been previously deported five times, was charged for the murder. Mr. Lopez-Sanchez’s long history of crime and immigration violations fueled critiques of city policies and put the federal spotlight back onto sanctuary cities. The House of Representatives has since passed H.R. 3009, which would deny some federal assistance to localities that enact provisions prohibiting officers from taking certain actions with respect to immigration. President-elect Donald Trump recently announced his bold plan to cancel all federal funding to such localities. Other immigration-focused measures continue to be introduced and discussed in Congress.\n\nIf passed, what practical impact would H.R. 3009, or similar legislation, have on local immigration enforcement? The bill still has considerable obstacles to overcome. However, enactment of such legislation has the potential to push local enforcement towards cooperation with federal policy.","PeriodicalId":373432,"journal":{"name":"Michigan Journal of Race & Law","volume":"98 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Michigan Journal of Race & Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36643/mjrl.22.1.pushing","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Sanctuary jurisdictions refer to city, town, and state governments (collectively, localities or local governments) that have passed provisions to limit their enforcement of federal immigration laws. Such local governments execute limiting provisions in order to bolster community cooperation, prevent racial discrimination, focus on local priorities for enforcement, or even to a show a local policy that differs from federal policy. The provisions are in the forms of executive orders, municipal ordinances, and state resolutions. Additionally, the scope of the provisions vary by locality: some prohibit law enforcement from asking about immigration status, while others prohibit the use of state resources to enforce federal immigration laws. Despite these variations, such local provisions intend to stifle cooperation with the federal government to adopt a more inclusionary local enforcement policy. Immigration policy is unanimously understood as a federal power, suggesting that federal immigration laws preempt the local governments’ provisions. Such preemption challenges have been brought to court, yet sanctuary cities remain largely untouched. The July 2015 murder of Kate Steinle in San Francisco, CA, renewed political discourse on the topic. Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez, an undocumented immigrant who had been previously deported five times, was charged for the murder. Mr. Lopez-Sanchez’s long history of crime and immigration violations fueled critiques of city policies and put the federal spotlight back onto sanctuary cities. The House of Representatives has since passed H.R. 3009, which would deny some federal assistance to localities that enact provisions prohibiting officers from taking certain actions with respect to immigration. President-elect Donald Trump recently announced his bold plan to cancel all federal funding to such localities. Other immigration-focused measures continue to be introduced and discussed in Congress. If passed, what practical impact would H.R. 3009, or similar legislation, have on local immigration enforcement? The bill still has considerable obstacles to overcome. However, enactment of such legislation has the potential to push local enforcement towards cooperation with federal policy.
终结庇护城市:会发生吗?
庇护管辖区是指市、镇和州政府(统称为地方或地方政府)通过了限制其执行联邦移民法的规定。这样的地方政府执行限制性条款是为了加强社区合作,防止种族歧视,将执法重点放在地方优先事项上,甚至是为了展示不同于联邦政策的地方政策。这些规定以行政命令、市政条例和州决议的形式存在。此外,这些条款的范围因地区而异:有些禁止执法部门询问移民身份,而另一些禁止使用州资源来执行联邦移民法。尽管存在这些差异,但这些地方规定意在扼杀与联邦政府的合作,以采取更具包容性的地方执法政策。移民政策被一致理解为联邦权力,这表明联邦移民法优先于地方政府的规定。这种先发制人的挑战已经告上法庭,但庇护城市基本上没有受到影响。2015年7月,凯特·斯坦勒(Kate Steinle)在加州旧金山被谋杀,再次引发了有关该话题的政治讨论。胡安·弗朗西斯科·洛佩斯-桑切斯是一名非法移民,此前曾五次被驱逐出境,他被指控犯有谋杀罪。洛佩兹-桑切斯的长期犯罪和违反移民法的历史引发了对城市政策的批评,并使联邦政府的焦点重新回到庇护城市。此后,众议院通过了H.R. 3009法案,该法案将拒绝向颁布禁止官员在移民问题上采取某些行动的地方提供一些联邦援助。当选总统唐纳德·特朗普最近宣布了他的大胆计划,取消对这些地方的所有联邦资助。国会继续提出和讨论其他以移民为重点的措施。如果通过,H.R. 3009或类似的立法将对当地移民执法产生什么实际影响?该法案仍有相当多的障碍需要克服。然而,这种立法的颁布有可能推动地方执法与联邦政策合作。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信