1793: The Fugitive Slave Act

Finally, in 1854, the first state high court declared the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 to be unconstitutional. The state of Wisconsin ruled in favor of abolitionist Sherman Booth, who had helped slave Joshua Glover escape to safety. The United States Supreme Court eventually overturned this ruling, declaring the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 to be constitutional and upholding the law. This political move frustrated the abolitionists, even those who considered themselves to be less extreme.

The Fugitive Slave Law or Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 was a law passed by the United States Congress on September 18th. This Law stated that all people who had escaped from slavery must be returned to their owners. Keep in mind that in this situation slaves were traded and bought, sort of thought of back then what farm equipment is now. If people in the North, Where Slavery was not legal, hid or in some way helped slaves, they were breaking the law of the land. Law officials everywhere now had a duty to arrest anyone that was suspected of being a runaway slave, with very little evidence needed except the owners testimony of ownership. The suspected slave could not ask for a jury trial or testify on his or her own behalf.

One of the most talked about bills is TX Senate Bill 4. SB4, often referred to as a “Sanctuary City ban,” has already been signed into law by Gov. Greg Abbott. SB4 requires local law enforcement, including campus police, to comply with the requests of federal immigration

The term sanctuary city or campus has no legal binding but says a locality won't help the federal government hold undocumented citizens until the deportation process. In Cornell's case that would mean campus police wouldn't look for undocumented students to turn them into immigration authorities. "I think everyone wants the rule of law to be followed and they don't want to see law breakers be rewarded but immigration is different. It's not like they broke a criminal law they just violated our immigration policy and statutes and if they've contributed to the united states its not in the interest of the United States to kick them out," explains Immagration

Constitution. New federal laws have buckled down on immigration, however this does not affect sanctuary cities. Sanctuary cities do not have to follow the exaggerated immigration laws, due to the tenth amendment. The tenth amendment separates federal and state powers, meaning that the states have jurisdiction in sanctuary cities. Referencing the Immigrant Legal Resource Center, the Amendment prevents the “federal government from coercing state or local governments to use their resources to enforce a federal regulatory program …” Similarly to how the tenth amendment protects sanctuary cities from federal law, it also protects them from the federal government attempting to force sanctuary cities to provide information. For this reason, sanctuary cities keep a “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy. In addition to the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy, sanctuary cities are protected another way. The Immigrant Legal Resource Center assures that, “Congress cannot compel state or local governments to collect immigration status information in order to share it with the federal government.” The “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy refers to the sanctuary cities version of not collecting data. Without collecting data, these cities are never in violation of federal law. There is very limited record keeping done in these cities, which works in tandem with the don’t ask, don’t tell” policy. Therefore, the tenth amendment of the U.S. Constitution protects sanctuary cities from the federal government in enforcing federal law, forcing private information from the cities, and protecting the citizens of these cities with a “don’t ask, don’t tell”

Before being elected as sheriff, she campaigned to end voluntary compliance with ICE as one of her leading issues. This means that Austin, Texas will become the first true sanctuary city of the state. Under her policy due to have taken effect 1 Feb 2017, she will only honor ICE detainer requests for inmates who have been charged with murder, sexual assault, or human trafficking. In a statement Sheriff Sally Hernandez said, “[My] office in completely lawful and upholding the constitution with our ICE policy. We are in full compliance with 8 USC 1373. Our policy states in item #10 that “This policy in no way prohibits or restricts sending information to or requesting or receiving information from ICE regarding an individual’s immigration or citizenship status….” She is very confident that her stance on immigration does not interfere with federal laws. “I just don’t think you solve the criminal process by deporting them” said Sheriff Sally

It also subjects law enforcement to a class A misdemeanor for failing to “hold non-citizen inmates subject to removal” (Aguilar). This creates various responses from police officers whom come from an undocumented family and do not personally agree with this. Sheriff Sally Hernandez from Travis county in Texas decided to take a stand against this new ban against sanctuary cities. Sheriff Sally decided that her county will not comply with this infringement on families and their safety (Aguilar). This caused the state to “deprive the local government of all of its state funding,” showing that this is going to be a long battle between the state and local government of Texas and Travis County. The state is disciplining the local government of Travis County by withholding all state funding which is quite detrimental to the county itself (Aguilar). State government definitely uses their money as a source of power over local government. This seems very over-the-top but it is what the state finds necessary to uphold order and

The federal acts of 1793 and 1850 provided for the return between states of escaped black slaves. Alike laws existing in both North and South in colonial days applied also to white indentured servants and to Native American slaves. Many Northern states also passed personal-liberty laws that allowed fugitives a jury trial, and others passed laws forbidding state officials to help capture alleged fugitive slaves or to lodge them in state jails. As a concession to the South a second and more rigorous fugitive slave law was passed as part of the Compromise of 1850.

Any place of refuge or asylum can be a sanctuary, though there is no specific legal definition to what constitutes a sanctuary jurisdiction. These communities can be states, cities or counties with established policies that limit cooperation with federal immigration authorities to protect undocumented immigrants from deportation. The state of Maryland is pushing for a bill that will limit available state and local resources during the enforcement of immigration laws. Whilst some people are of an opinion that the state government should not be writing laws shielding illegal immigrants from US federal government immigration laws, others maintain that Maryland officials should move forward with their ideas of a sanctuary. There is debate over the safety of immigrants and of

I think these cities are hazardous to protect legal citizens. For example, in San Francisco (a sanctuary city), a

1793 was the first known start of what is now known today as Sanctuary Cities except back then it was called “The Fugitive Slave Act.” The sanctuary city was home to America’s first significant class of refugees or fugitive slaves as they were called back then (Baker, 2017). The name “sanctuary cities” comes from the 1980s protests of federal immigration policies that refused shelter to refugees from El Salvador and Guatemala. San Francisco led the way by passing a city ordinance in 1985 that specifically prohibited city police or civil magistrates from helping federal immigration officers, more cities followed suit. So did organizations not license by the state, like churches. H. Robert Baker who is a Professor

The idea of Sanctuary City is pleasant however achieving the goal to become one is difficult to accomplish. Solidarity Among Borders proves to tackle the issues relating to the detainment and oppression of undocumented workers and refugees or those who don't have a full status (citizenship or permanent residence) from law enforcement. Ever since Montreal has declared themselves a sanctuary city, they have been following closely and have found that the declaration does not match up with the actions of the city and law enforcement. There is one particular response made by Solidarity Across Borders which explains what needs to be put in place for Montreal to better accommodate undocumented immigrants and refugees. They explain how the declaration implies that the city of Montreal needs to have non-cooperation with the Canadian Border Services Agency (CBSA) in order to defend and protect those who are

What are sanctuary cities? Considered “safe spaces” for illegal aliens, these are cities that have policies which shield illegal aliens from deportation. These cities sanctuary policies usually have a part that prevents Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials from enforcing immigration laws. Why are these cities dangerous? I have found there three reasons these cities are dangerous.

This petition was towards the Fugitive Slave Act of 1793, which they criticized for encouraging cruelty and brutality and the supporting of capturing free black slaves

For years, America has been considered a safe zone for all of its residents. Europeans came to America hundreds of years ago to escape religious persecution. Jewish people in Europe came to America in the 1900s to escape anti-Semetic violence. People from Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador come to America to find safety from drug violence and gangs in their countries. Therefore, America can be considered a home to anyone who needs it. The idea of America being a place of safety and shelter, regardless of religion, race, or how someone chooses to live their life is a huge part of America’s identity, and various texts from the late 1700s and 1800s showcase this.