That same week, in late April, President Donald Trump touched off a national firestorm of debate over immigration policy. He signed an executive order directing his administration to identify every sanctuary jurisdiction in the country. Trump went so far as to attack these areas, or sanctuary cities, for their resistance to cooperating with federal immigration authorities. He described them as “a lawless insurrection.” The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has publicly named 289 sheriffs from jurisdictions large and small that it claims are not complying with ICE detainer requests. This adjustment has caused a firestorm of criticism from governors, police chiefs, and mayors.
Sheriff Kieran Donahue, president of the National Sheriffs’ Association, voiced strong opposition to the DHS’s actions. In his testimony, he said the list was developed without consultation with Louisiana’s local sheriffs and described it as a non-transparent, non-accountable “black hole.” Donahue further explained that this strategy erodes the trust-building efforts that local law enforcement have been working to maintain with their immigrant communities.
“They think because they don’t have one law or another on the books that they don’t qualify, but they do qualify. They are giving sanctuary to criminals.” – Kristi Noem
The full list includes locals favorites, such as San Diego. In San Diego, city attorney Heather Ferbert was outspoken in her opposition to the designation of San Diego’s status as a sanctuary jurisdiction. Ferbert argued that San Diego has never had a sanctuary policy. He challenged the DHS’s rationale for including the city on the list, calling it politically motivated.
“We suspect this is going to be used as additional threats and fear tactics to threaten federal funding that the city relies on.” – Heather Ferbert
Indeed, numerous municipalities around the country are in federal court challenging their designations as sanctuary cities. This is particularly the case for cities in Southern California, Colorado, and Massachusetts. Defenders of immigrant rights have long supported sanctuary policies. They argue that these deprioritization measures establish trust between immigrant communities and law enforcement, enabling all residents to report crimes without the threat of deportation.
Democrats have been champions of these policies because of their community outreach–building approach that increases trust in law enforcement and keeps communities safe. They argue that if and when local police cooperate with federal immigration officials, immigrants will be afraid to report crimes. This unholy alliance would eventually leave our communities less safe.
Donahue’s criticism of the DHS list highlights concerns over its impact on local law enforcement’s ability to build relationships within diverse communities. He stated that the list “violated the core principles of trust, cooperation, and partnership with fellow law enforcement.”
Debate over sanctuary jurisdictions is firing up. Supporters and opponents alike are obviously intently focused on how this question will first play out in the political arena and then affect actual local communities.