New York City's Sanctuary Policy and the Effect of Such Policies on Public Safety, Law Enforcement, and Immigration


Book Description

New York city's "sanctuary" policy and the effect of such policies on public safety, law enforcement, and immigration : hearing before the Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and Claims of the Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives, One Hundred Eighth Congress, first session, February 27, 2003.







New York City's `Sanctuary' Policy and the Effect of Such Policies on Public Safety, Law Enforcement, and Immigration


Book Description

Witnesses: John Feinblatt, Criminal Justice Coord., City of N.Y.; Michael J. Cutler, former Sr. Special Agent, N.Y. District Office, Immigration & Naturalization Service (INS); John Nickell, Officer, Houston Police Dept.; & Leslye E. Orloff, Immigrant Women Program, NOW Legal Defense & Educ. Fund. Materials submitted for the Hearing: Exec. Order 124, City Policy Concerning Aliens, N.Y. City; Gen. Order, Houston Police Dept.; INS Memo; Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee from TX, Ranking Member, Subcomm. on Immigration, Border Security, & Claims, Comm. on the Judiciary, U.S. House of Rep.; & Rep. John Conyers, Jr. from MI, Ranking Member, Comm. on the Judiciary. Charts & tables.




Sanctuary Cities


Book Description

The accidental shooting of Kathryn Steinle in July of 2015 by an undocumented immigrant ignited a firestorm of controversy around sanctuary cities, which are municipalities where officials are prohibited from inquiring into the immigration status of residents. Some decline immigration detainer requests from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. While sanctuary cities have been in existence since the 1980s, the Steinle shooting and the presidency of Donald Trump have brought them renewed attention and raised a number of questions. How have these policies evolved since the 1980s and how has the media framed them? Do sanctuary policies "breed crime" as some have argued, or do they help to politically incorporate immigrant populations? What do Americans think about sanctuary cities, and have their attitudes changed in recent years? How are states addressing the conflict between sanctuary cities and the federal government? In one of the first comprehensive examinations of sanctuary cities, Loren Collingwood and Benjamin Gonzalez O'Brien show that sanctuary policies have no discernible effect on crime rates; rather, anti-sanctuary state laws may undercut communities' trust in law enforcement. Indeed, sanctuary policies do have the potential to better incorporate immigrant populations into the larger city, with both Latino police force representation and Latino voter turnout increasing as a result. Despite this, public opinion on sanctuary cities remains sharply divided and has become intensely partisanized. Looking at public opinion data, media coverage, and the evolution of sanctuary policies from the 1980s to 2010s, the authors show that conservatives have increasingly drawn on anecdotal evidence to link violent crime to the larger debate about undocumented immigration. This has, in turn, provided them an electoral advantage among conservative voters who often see undocumented immigrants as a threat and has led to a push for anti-sanctuary policies in conservative states that effectively preempt local initiatives aimed at immigrant incorporation. Ultimately, this book finds that sanctuary cities provide important protection for immigrants, helping them to become part of the social and political fabric of the United States, with no empirical support for the negative consequences conservatives and anti-immigrant activists so often claim.










Constructing Pro-immigrant Spaces


Book Description

In the United States, sanctuary cities are generally defined as sub-federal jurisdictions that refrain from engaging in the enforcement of federal immigration law. Proponents defend sanctuary cities based on the claim that local participation in immigration enforcement compromises trust and cooperation between residents and local law enforcement agencies which is detrimental to public safety. Not surprisingly, many existing studies have treated “sanctuary city” as a binary independent variable tied to sub-federal involvement in immigration enforcement. These studies have no doubt been instrumental to advancing our knowledge of local responses to expanding and intensifying federal immigration enforcement. However, sociological insight into sanctuary cities is likely to benefit from broadening current perspectives and assessing the potential implications sanctuary city policies have for shaping local contexts of reception and facilitating immigrant integration. The emerging interest in the study of sanctuary cities among sociologists has seen very little intersection with relevant bodies of literature on contexts of reception, immigrant assimilation, and citizenship. This dissertation is an in-depth exploration of sanctuary city policies at the municipal level with attention to the intended outcomes associated with sanctuary cities as they pertain to not only public safety and crime, but also immigrant inclusion and participation in civic spaces. Specifically, this study is informed by comprehensive content analyses of legislative text, police documents, and news media from 1979 to 2019, covering 210 sanctuary cities across 41 states. A case study of Seattle is also conducted to provide a closer look at the meanings policy makers, civil servants, and service providers attach to the concept of “sanctuary.” Using 23 semi-structured in-depth interviews, the case study examines the processes by which employees of the City of Seattle and immigrant-serving non-profit organizations widen the boundaries of inclusion and participation for immigrants while simultaneously resisting and operating within the legal framework of hostile federal immigration laws. This dissertation builds upon current understandings of sanctuary cities and introduces new angles for theorizing and conceptualizing sanctuary cities as more than just a place-based designation. The content analyses highlight the different strategies cities adopt to dilute the reach of federal immigration enforcement and policing on vulnerable immigrant populations. While proponents and opponents of sanctuary cities tend to converge around narratives of public safety and crime, the findings from my dissertation suggest that there are additional considerations that inform the development and implementation of sanctuary city policies. Furthermore, policymakers and advocates in cities center decisions in response to federal immigration enforcement priorities around objectives that potentially shape immigrant experiences such as integration, civic engagement, and the practice of citizenship. Supplementary analyses conducted in Seattle provide support for recognizing sanctuary city policies as pro-immigrant policies that are intended to encourage immigrant participation and inclusion in civic spaces, in addition to building trust and cooperation between city officials and residents to promote public safety. Specifically, the Welcoming City resolution in Seattle is analyzed as a framework for developing pro-immigrant policies and practices that facilitate civic engagement, affirm membership, and enable immigrants to practice local citizenship in their daily lives.




Enforcing Immigration Law at the State and Local Levels


Book Description

Almost 12 million out-of-status aliens currently reside in the United States, and it is estimated that it will take 15 years and more than $5 billion for the Department of Homeland Security's Immigration and Customs Enforcement to apprehend just the current backlog of absconders. One proposed solution to this enforcement problem is for federal agencies to partner with state and local law-enforcement agencies to apprehend and deport fugitive aliens. Currently, the federal government does not require state and local agencies to carry out specific immigration enforcement actions; however, comprehensive immigration reform may address this issue in the near future. Before such legislation is drafted and considered, it is important to understand all the potential impacts of a policy incorporating immigration enforcement by nonfederal entities. As there is very limited evidence about the effects of involving state and local law enforcement in immigration enforcement duties, the authors seek to clarify the needs and concerns of key stakeholders by describing variations in enforcement approaches and making their pros and cons more explicit. They also suggest areas for research to add empirical evidence to the largely anecdotal accounts that now characterize discussions of the involvement of state and local law enforcement in immigration enforcement efforts.




'Sanctuary' Laws


Book Description

The policy of “immigration federalism” has justified granting state and local police officers greatly increased responsibilities for enforcing immigration laws, but the devolution of power has also generated enormous controversy. Supporters argue that the vast number of local police and their knowledge of local conditions can substantially assist federal immigration enforcement. Critics say that the policy has caused serious problems, including increased racial profiling and more pretextual arrests for minor crimes, and that the resulting alienation of immigrant communities has reduced public safety. The controversy is not just academic, as more than 270 local jurisdictions have adopted policies designed to resist immigration federalism. Some argue that these laws have only one purpose: to thwart federal enforcement and shelter illegal immigrants. National legislators have proposed legislation to squelch local resistance by cutting federal funds to those localities. Such responses are, however, fundamentally inconsistent with the very theory of federalism. The widespread resistance to immigration federalism is a state/local-inspired reaction to the serious, if unintended consequences of localized immigration policing. A true immigration federalist should view such local resistance not as mere opposition to quash, but as a “new immigration federalism,” a source of insight into the on-the-ground problems with current immigration policies. This article argues that the policies enacted as part of the local resistance movement point the way both to specific solutions, and to a better - and more theoretically sound - immigration federalism. This “new immigration federalism” is already having an effect on federal immigration policy.




Sanctuary Practices in International Perspectives


Book Description

This collection contains a rich and up-to-date mix of specific substantive empirical case studies and theoretically-driven analyses from multiple disciplinary perspectives and is international in scope. This is the first time studies and discussion of sanctuary practices outside the US context (e.g., in the UK, Germany, the Nordic countries and Canada) and of recent developments within the US context (e.g., the New Sanctuary Movement), along with accounts of sanctuary as a mutating set of practices and spaces (e.g., pre-modern and terrorist sanctuary), have been brought together in one collection.