Sanctuary Cities and Law Enforcement

Sanctuary cities have been controversial since their inception. But the debate over sanctuary cities has intensified in the last few years.

In July 2015, San Francisco police released an undocumented immigrant despite a detainer request from the Department of Homeland Security. The man had several previous felony convictions and had been deported five times.

After his release, the man allegedly shot and killed a woman. The incident prompted renewed scrutiny of cities with sanctuary practices.

Arguments against sanctuary cities

After his election, Donald Trump promised to cut off federal funding to sanctuary cities and remove 2 million undocumented criminals from the U.S. He said sanctuary cities harbor dangerous criminals and result in “needless deaths.”

Some argue that sanctuary city practices make it more difficult for federal law enforcement agencies to combat gangs and terrorism.

"Sanctuary policies, official or de facto, result in safe havens (or safer havens) for illegal aliens involved in a variety of criminal enterprises,” the Ohio Jobs & Justice PAC says on its website. “Sanctuary policies inhibit the ability of law enforcement officers to accurately identify foreign nationals, which makes it more difficult to uncover their illegal activities.”

Also, the argument goes, when undocumented criminals don't get deported, police departments spend valuable time and resources re-arresting them.

Groups such as The Center for Immigration Studies say that sanctuary practices make immigration policy overly convoluted.

“That’s why immigration is a federal responsibility,” Jessica Vaughan, the Center’s director of policy, told The Washington Post. “You cannot have 3,000 different policies, it’s chaos.”

Arguments for sanctuary cities

Even with Trump’s threat of blocking funding, many of the cities and counties with sanctuary policies have said they will continue their practices.

Many argue that complying with ICE detainer requests could harm police-community trust. Community officials say strict immigration enforcement can make undocumented people afraid to report crimes.

Some worry that using local law enforcement agencies to enforce immigration policies could also result in discrimination. “We find this involvement of local jails really troubling," Lena Graber, an attorney for the Immigrant Legal Resource Center told The Washington Post.

"It really undermines the idea that the criminal legal system protects everyone when a police stop is a gateway to deportation.” 

Some law enforcement officials simply argue that complying with detainer requests drains valuable resources. Detaining undocumented suspects can cost local jails hundreds of thousands of dollars each year.

And, according to The New York Times, most of the immigrants deported under Obama’s presidency had committed minor crimes or had no criminal record.

In Printz v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled that the federal government cannot force state or local officials to enforce federal law.

Therefore, sanctuary cities are constitutional. The Constitution does not require local law enforcement agencies to help deport undocumented immigrants.

That’s the federal government’s job. However, some experts point out that the constitution may not protect cities and counties that refuse to share information with the federal government.

In Reno v. Condon, the Supreme Court ruled that the federal government could regulate states sharing people’s personal information.

In the decision, Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist wrote that the law in question did not violate the principles of federalism because it didn’t “require state officials to assist in the enforcement of federal statutes regulating private individuals.”

So the federal government can’t force local law enforcement agencies to detain undocumented immigrants. But it may be able to require them to share information about immigrants so federal officials can enforce immigration laws.

Immigration policy and enforcement practices are complex and ever changing. And with Trump now in office, the debate over sanctuary cities isn’t going away anytime soon.

When creating policies for your law enforcement agency, you must take local laws and regulations into account. Immigration policies in your state, county, or city may facilitate cooperation with ICE or restrict cooperation.

You must comply with those laws. Be sure to collaborate with leaders in your city and county to make sure you are all on the same page.

Your agency doesn’t have to enforce federal immigration policy, but refusing to share information with the federal government could get you in trouble.

Restricting information could cause your agency to lose federal funding. So keep an eye on case law in this area.

As the debate over sanctuary cities continues, it’s increasingly important for your law enforcement agency to establish thorough policies.

Laws and standards change, so make sure your agency regularly updates policies and trains officers on correct practices.