Sanctuary Cities
Asian American Organizing Project
March 8, 2018
Introduction
Sanctuary cities have faced several threats from the Trump Administration in the past year. There isn’t one singular definition of what constitutes a sanctuary city, but in general sanctuary cities will not use their law enforcement to cooperate with an aspect of federal immigration law. Some sanctuary city policies include restricting the use of local law enforcement to arrest and detain undocumented immigrants based on their citizenship status. Other policies do not allow law enforcement to ask people about their immigration status. Places with sanctuary policies choose to not engage with Section 287(g), a federal law that allows for local law enforcement to enforce immigration law (1). This law is useful for the Department of Homeland Security because it expands their capacity to detain immigrants. As the number of detentions of undocumented immigrants rises, more local governments are instituting sanctuary policies.
No law states that local governments cannot become sanctuary cities. However, the Trump Administration has made several anti-sanctuary cities statements the past year, including an executive order that attempted to cut off federal funding from jurisdictions who did not help immigration officials arrest people. However, a federal judge blocked the order (2). Despite the administration’s opposition, sanctuary cities are legal.
There is a false misconception that undocumented immigrants cannot be detained and deported if they reside in sanctuary cities. Federal immigration officials can still detain undocumented immigrants in sanctuary cities. In general, most sanctuary cities do not use local law enforcement to assist in the detention of undocumented immigrants. However, the cities can still be mandated to communicate with federal officials under section 1373 of federal immigration law.
This policy brief will give an overview of sanctuary cities. It will discuss the status of sanctuary policies Minneapolis and St. Paul, the current state of sanctuary city laws, threats from the Trump Administration, and legislative threats. Recommendations on improving sanctuary city policies in Minnesota will also be discussed.
Places with Sanctuary City Laws
Several places have adopted sanctuary city policies. Several major cities, including New York, Chicago, and Boston, passed laws that protect undocumented immigrants with varying degrees of protection. For some cities, such as San Francisco, sanctuary city laws bar authorities from detaining undocumented immigrants solely on the basis of their immigration status (3). A criminal charge or history of a previous felony is needed. Other cities, such as Birmingham, have passed resolutions that state that they welcome immigrants, but these resolutions do not have any impact on law or policy (4). Sanctuary city laws widely vary between city-to-city.
Some places have passed anti-sanctuary laws. For example, Alabama passed the Beason-Hammon Act in 2016, in which part of the law prohibits cities within Alabama to pass any policies that go against federal immigration law (5). Other places have attempted to laws that use local police to actively enforce immigration laws. In 2017, the Texas Legislature passed SB4, which mandated local police to comply with detainer requests from ICE (6). Since most of the places with sanctuary policies are cities, state policies such as the ones in Alabama and Texas are harmful because they prevent municipalities from acting against the federal government.
In 2017, California became the first sanctuary state. California’s law mandates the police to not turn over undocumented immigrants based on their immigration status. Recently, the Justice Department filed a lawsuit against California, alleging these laws obstruct federal authorities from conducting business (7).
Situation in Minneapolis and St. Paul
Both current mayors of Minneapolis and St. Paul have affirmed their commitment to protecting undocumented immigrants (8). Minneapolis mayor Jacob Frey said that the separation ordinance in Minneapolis protects undocumented immigrants from getting asked their citizenship status by the police. St. Paul mayor Melvin Carter defined a sanctuary city as a city that protects their fellow immigrant neighbors. He took a stronger stance than Frey, stating that a sanctuary city should not only focus on protecting undocumented folks but provide them the means to thrive as a resident of Saint Paul regardless of citizenship status.
Minneapolis (9) and St. Paul (10) both have under separation ordinances, which are local laws on immigration issues. Employees can only ask for someone’s immigration status if it pertains to eligibility of services. When using resources, people may present official identification from their home countries, such as passports or drivers licenses, as identification with the exception of filling out I-9 Forms. City officials also cannot use city resources to actively seek to arrest undocumented immigrants. Public safety officials cannot arrest or detain undocumented immigrants on the basis of their immigration status. The city attorney’s office is the exception to these rules. They can question immigrants on their immigration status if it is relevant to their case.
Having a sanctuary ordinance does not protect undocumented immigrants from detention. These sanctuary ordinances do not protect undocumented immigrants from other law enforcement officials, including the Metro Transit Authority (MTA), county sheriff’s office, state troopers, and federal immigration officials. While a Minneapolis Police Officer cannot ask for someone’s immigration status, these other officials can still ask for people’s status and arrest them.
One major problem with the sanctuary ordinances in Minneapolis and St. Paul is the fact that immigrants can still be arrested, taken to the Hennepin County or Ramsey County jails, and then sent to a detention center. Neither of the Twin Cities has their own city jails, so all arrested people are taken to the county jails. The current Hennepin County Sheriff Richard Stanek detains undocumented immigrants on arrival to the Hennepin County Jail. There has been no reported information on whether this occurs in the Ramsey County Jail, but it is likely.
Current Law on Sanctuary Cities
There is no federal law that municipalities or states cannot be sanctuary cities (11). Furthermore, there is no federal definition of a sanctuary city. The federal government cannot use the resources of local and state government in order to enforce immigration law, as it is an immigration issue.
The only federal law that is related to sanctuary cities is 8 U.S.C. § 1373, in which cities or states cannot block communication with the federal government about someone’s citizenship status or immigration status. This law does not require any state or local government to take any action (12). Additionally, ICE cannot ask for other information outside of a person’s immigration or citizenship status, such as contact information or criminal history. This law simply states that a jurisdiction’s government must comply when asked to give information on someone’s citizenship status or immigration status.
Punishments To Sanctuary Cities
While sanctuary cities are compliant with federal law, the Department of Homeland Security and Attorney General’s office have questioned the legality of sanctuary cities and have threatened to attack sanctuary cities through increased raids, arresting officials, and withholding federal funding.
ICE and DHS have targeted sanctuary cities in retaliation for their status. In September 2017, ICE conducted “Operation Safe City,” in which they conducted immigration raids in sanctuary cities across the United States (13). According to ICE, the agents specifically targeted cities where officers were “denied access to jails and prisons to interview suspected immigration violators or jurisdictions where ICE detainers are not honored.” Detainers are requests to jails from ICE to hold undocumented immigrants for up to 48 hours until ICE has time to collect the immigrant and detain them. In January 2018, Thomas Homan, head of DHS, has threatened crackdowns against California, which is the first sanctuary state. (14)
Additionally, the Department of Justice has threatened to arrest mayors of sanctuary cities (15). The department has suggested charging officials responsible for sanctuary policies with crimes. People have challenged the constitutionality of this threat, stating that the proposal is in direct opposition to the first amendment. It is expected that the Department of Justice will not carry out with this threat.
Lastly, the Trump administration has attempted to cut federal funding to sanctuary cities. In January 2017, Trump signed an executive order that cut off funding from sanctuary cities, with the exception of funding for law enforcement. In November 2017, a federal judge blocked the order on the grounds that the President violated the separation of powers clause in the Constitution (16).
Legislative Threats
Congress has made threats to limiting federal funding of sanctuary cities. The No Sanctuary For Criminals Act restricts funding to sanctuary cities. The bill passed the House in June 2017, but it has yet to be taken up by the Senate as of March 2018.
Many of the others bills proposed have not passed any committee and it is likely that they will not advance to the floor of the House or Senate.
Below is a list of anti-sanctuary bills, which is non-exhaustive.
H.R.83 — 115th Congress (2017-2018)
Mobilizing Against Sanctuary Cities Act
S.2192 — 115th Congress (2017-2018)
SECURE Act of 2017
S.87 — 115th Congress (2017-2018)
Stop Dangerous Sanctuary Cities Act
H.R.824 — 115th Congress (2017-2018)
No Transportation Funds for Sanctuary Cities Act
There have been a few bills that have tried to protect sanctuary cities. They are also unlikely to pass.
Below is a list of pro-sanctuary bills, which is non-exhaustive.
H.R.1076 — 115th Congress (2017-2018)
Protect Our Sanctuary Cities Act
H.R.748 — 115th Congress (2017-2018)
Safeguarding Sanctuary Cities Act of 2017
Conclusion and Recommendations
In the past year, places that have passed pro-sanctuary policies have faced several challenges under the Trump Administration. Several sanctuary cities have been subjected to ICE raids based on their status alone. Additionally, the Trump Administration and Justice Department have taken several measures attempting to punish sanctuary cities, including an unsuccessful executive order cutting federal funding, threats to mayors of sanctuary cities, subpoenas to sanctuary cities and a pending lawsuit against California’s status as a sanctuary state. About 31 states are considering anti-sanctuary laws, according to the National Council of State Legislatures. With sanctuary cities under judicial threat, options might become limited in defending the issue from a grassroots organizing standpoint.
One of AAOP’s partners, the Minnesota Immigration Rights Action Committee (MIRAC), is spearheading the “Sanctuary Now!” campaign. This campaign focuses on a myriad of issues that would strengthen Minneapolis’s status as a sanctuary city, which include funding legal representation for immigrants, obtaining municipal ID, and passing an ordinance to ban detention centers from Minneapolis. So far, MIRAC has achieved expedited U-Visa certification and establishing a municipal office for Immigrant and Refugee Relationships. In February 2018, AAOP signed onto their platform.
Obtaining municipal IDs in the Twin Cities is one of the highest priority policies that AAOP can support. With a municipal ID, immigrants will be able to establish credibility with law enforcement officials and have a lesser chance in being arrested and detained. Additionally, municipal IDs could lead to undocumented immigrants feeling more comfortable reporting crimes. Many oppose municipal IDs because of the cost and resources of implementing them.
Additionally, a next step is to advocate for Minnesota to become a sanctuary state. In 2017, Rep. Ilhan Omar introduced HF 1576, a bill that would make Minnesota a sanctuary state by banning law enforcement officials to arrest someone based on their immigration status. Currently, the legislature is led by a Republican majority and it is unlikely they will pass the law. However, the 2018 elections could change the composition of the legislature and switch to a Democratic majority, which would increase the likelihood of passing the bill.
Footnotes
(1) Misra, Tanvi. 2017. “The Rise of Anti-Sanctuary Cities.” CityLab. March 1, 2017. https://www.citylab.com/equity/2017/03/the-rise-of-anti-sanctuary-cities/517377/.
(2) Gonzales, Richard. 2017. “Federal Court Says Trump Administration Can’t Deny Funds To Sanctuary Cities.” NPR.Org. September 25, 2017. https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/09/15/551397597/federal-court-says-trump-administration-can-t-deny-funds-to-sanctuary-cities.
(3) Carcamo, Mather, and Smith. 2016. “Trump’s Crackdown on Illegal Immigration Leaves a Lot Unanswered for Sanctuary Cities like L.A.” November 16, 2016. http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-sanctuary-cities-20161114-story.html.
(4) Watkins, Mia. 2017. “Birmingham City Council Passes Sanctuary City Resolution.” WBRC Fox 6 News. January 31, 2017. http://www.wbrc.com/story/34390802/birmingham-city-council-passes-sanctuary-city-resolution.
(5) Edgemon, Erun. 2017. “Immigrant Group Asks Birmingham to Declare Itself a Sanctuary City.” AL.Com. June 13, 2017. http://www.al.com/news/birmingham/index.ssf/2017/06/immigrant_group_asks_birmingha.html.
(6) Dinan, Stephan. 2017. “Appeals Court Revives Texas Anti-Sanctuary City Law.” The Washington Times. September 25, 2017. //www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/sep/25/court-revives-texas-anti-sanctuary-city-law/.
(7) Nichols, Chris. n.d. “Sessions Misleads in Claim Calif. Bans Cooperation with ICE.” @politifact. Accessed March 8, 2018. http://www.politifact.com/california/statements/2018/mar/07/jeff-sessions/jeff-sessions-misleading-claim-california-bans-pol/.
(8) Melo, Frederick. 2018. “Carter, Frey Promise Focus on Housing, Jobs, Transit While Defending ‘Sanctuary City’ Status.” Twin Cities, January 30, 2018. https://www.twincities.com/2018/01/30/mayor-carter-frey-focus-on-housing-jobs-transit-while-defending-sanctuary-city-status/.
(9) City of Minneapolis. 2017. “Code of Ordinances.” Chapter 19: Employee Authority in Immigration Matters. 2017. https://library.municode.com/mn/minneapolis/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=COOR_TIT2AD_CH19EMAUIMMA_19.10PUPOST.
(10) City of St. Paul. 2018. “Code of Ordinances.” 2018. https://library.municode.com/mn/st._paul/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=PTIIIADCO_TITIIIOFEM_CH44EMAUIMMA.
(11) Southern Poverty Law Center. 2017. “The Current State of Sanctuary Law.” May 15, 2017. https://www.splcenter.org/20170515/current-state-sanctuary-law.
(12) Washington Defender Association and Immigrant Legal Resource Center. 2017. “FAQ on 8 U.S.C. § 1373 and Federal Funding Threats to ‘Sanctuary Cities.’” https://www.ilrc.org/sites/default/files/resources/8_usc_1373_and_federal_funding_threats_to_sanctuary_cities.pdf.
(13) U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. 2017. “ICE Arrests over 450 on Federal Immigration Charges during Operation ‘Safe City.’” September 28, 2017. https://www.ice.gov/news/releases/ice-arrests-over-450-federal-immigration-charges-during-operation-safe-city.
(14) Sinclair, Harriet. 2018. “Trump’s ICE Pick Thomas Homan Warns Sanctuary State California ‘Hang On Tight’ Amid Immigration Crackdown.” January 3, 2018. http://www.newsweek.com/trumps-ice-pick-thomas-homan-warns-sanctuary-state-california-hang-tight-amid-768816.
(15) Rodriguez, Nicole. 2018. “Trump Administration Wants to Arrest Mayors of ‘Sanctuary Cities.’” January 16, 2018. http://www.newsweek.com/trump-administration-wants-arrest-mayors-sanctuary-cities-783010.
(16) Rosenberg, Eli. 2017. “Federal Judge Blocks Trump’s Executive Order on Denying Funding to Sanctuary Cities.” Washington Post, November 21, 2017, sec. Politics.