Pros And Cons Of Sanctuary Cities

Sanctuary cities are cities that limit their cooperation with the federal government's effort to enforce immigration laws . In other words, they harbor illegal immigrants . The idea is that illegals can go there and will be more willing to report crimes because there is no fear that they will be deported . In many cases however, this is not what happens . Illegal immigrants that are also criminals flock to these cities knowing that they cannot be detained because of their immigration status . This startling trend makes us ask the question, are sanctuary cities doing more harm than good to OUR country and OUR citizens ?

The sanctuary city movement started in 1985 in California . San Francisco passed an ordinance declaring it a “City of Refuge

It is really just up to the city and state. The state of Georgia formally banned sanctuary cities in 2009 and drove home their point in 2015 when they required cities the certify that they comply with federal immigration agents and regulations in order to receive state funding. Tennessee also took similar action. Tennessee state law prohibits the formation of policies that stop the compliance with federal immigration law. The Tennessee General Assembly also went on to withhold state funding to local governments that do not comply with federal law. Texas does not formally have any sanctuary cities by definition. However there are a few cities that do not fully comply with federal immigration regulations. Texas has passed legislation to rob these local governments of money in order to discourage such behavior.

On September 30th, 1996 the Clinton administration passed the Illegal Immigration and

Immigrant Responsibility Act ( Protesting U.S.-Mexico Border Policy) . This bill addresses the relationship between federal, state, and local governments. It also outlines that if an illegal immigrant commits a crime, no matter how insignificant, it can be grounds for deportation.

The overwhelming majority of all groups surveyed did not agree with sanctuary cities and the fact that they are able to ignore federal regulations. They do not feel that it is right for the local entities to be able to undermine federal government regulations. If the state and local governments are able to pick and choose which federal regulations they follow then there is no point in having any. However, the growth of our nation made it very evident that there needs to be one central government and several layers of lesser government underneath. This issue has roots all the way to the debate of federalism versus anti-federalism from two hundred years ago.

Our government is doing all that they can to put a stop to these so-called second chances.

President Trump passed an executive order on January 25th. The executive order authorizes action, including the withholding of federal funding, against any municipal or state entity that

“violates 8 U.S.C. 1373, or... prevents or hinders the enforcement of Federal law” (Boegel). This means that any city or local entity that practices sanctuary policies shall not receive