Cities and States Respond to Trump’s Immigration Plan

Throughout his presidential campaign, Donald Trump spoke on a platform of intensive immigration reform. His proposed immigration plan includes ending President Obama’s executive actions, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA). He is also proposing biometric visa tracking systems in all land, air and sea ports, and, of course, the wall.

Trump stated he’d cut federal funding to sanctuary cities in his first 100 days in office. In these cities — at least 130 of them, according to the Immigrant Legal Resource Center — local law enforcement agencies limit their interaction with federal immigration enforcement agents. Since his statement, officials from at least 37 of these cities said they would remain sanctuary cities for immigrant populations.

 Sanctuary cities across the country are stepping up protections for their undocumented immigrant residents. A $1 million legal defense fund was recently created in Chicago for immigrants facing deportation. Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel doubled down, saying that Chicago is, and will remain, a sanctuary city.

At the state level, lawmakers are working toward creating more laws to help their immigrant populations. In California, lawmakers are developing a bill that would create “safe zones” at public schools, hospitals and courthouses. The state is also considering creating a fund that would pay for legal counsel for immigrants facing deportation.

New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio vowed to protect the more than 500,000 undocumented immigrants registered in a municipal database. He stated that if the Trump administration requests data that may result in a NYC resident’s deportation, he would delete the database information.

Although the threat of cutting federal funding to these cities is ever present, some experts argue that defunding alone may not be realistically implemented. Phil Torrey, a Harvard Law School lecturer and supervising attorney of the Harvard Immigration Project, explained, “What the federal government can’t do at this point is basically pull funding wholesale from states and localities in order to get their local law enforcement agents to basically enforce federal immigration law.”

Torrey also explained that although the Department of Justice sets aside grants for these cities, the money lost would pale in comparison to the full amount federal funding they may receive.

Trump’s rhetoric may convey that the U.S. is shifting away from welcoming immigrants, but the sanctuary cities across the country are sending the opposite message. Whether the Trump administration will back down on this plan remains to be seen, but immigrants and activists continue to work toward more protections for their residents.

Category: Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement Comment »


Leave a Reply



 

Back to top