Cornell's Esmeralda Case Study

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

However, the Governor should also consider the purpose of a jail: to house those who have committed serious criminal offenses against others. Yet, many of the undocumented immigrants are not criminals. According to the Texas Department of Public Safety, approximately 210,000 criminal aliens have been booked into local Texas jails over a five-year period (2016). This number does not come close to constituting the majority of the undocumented population. Thus, it appears that the majority of undocumented immigrants are not causing problems. Conversely, undocumented immigrants may contribute to the economy in the form of paying sales taxes and other taxes, while not qualifying for benefits (Salamon et. al 2010). Therefore, jail would not be the appropriate place for these people, especially in light of the costs associated with their detention. Outside of illegally migrating to the country, these are a law-abiding group of people. Therefore, creating a policy that dismantles the protections that sanctuary cities provide could prove to be costlier than originally

Furthermore Jan C. ting asserts cities are able to challenge states laws regarding immigration but that “those laws enacted by Congress under the authority of the U.S. Constitution need to be respected and enforced.” This goes to show that if cities remain sanctuary than they are defining and going against the authority of the U.S. Constitution. The defiance leads to a questioning on the constitutional progress of the country. And they would be defying the Presidents orders. If the cities do decide

In “Sanctuary city districts brace for executive order to withhold funds”... by Angela Pascopella, she writes on how Donald Trump is attempting to stop the funding of these sanctuary cities. Sanctuary cities are places where Illegal immigrants, immigrants who entered the U. S. without the correct things to enter legally, are protected from the wrath of the government. The immigrants are protected by the county they are in, so that the federal government can’t take them away, because the county government has them under their control. For example, Los Angeles is a sanctuary city. Nearly 4 million of K12 students, or 7 percent of the U.S. come from undocumented families. Los Angeles and other cities like Chicago and New York try and protect

An “Illegal Immigrant” is someone who avoids inspection and/or overstays the period of time given to them as a tourist, business person, or a visitor(Dictonary.com). Illegal Immigrants need Sanctuary cities and open borders, but in reality, Sanctuary cites do not need Illegal Immigrants, and open borders because they are very well populated. According to Daily Signal, a news organization for society, news editor Josh Siegel posted a chart of the top U.S cities with the highest illegal population. The current population census in the top four sanctuary cities that are listed below are: Los Angeles, 4,041,707 people(Grad), New York City 8,537,637 people(ny.gov), Chicago 2,720,546 people (United States Census Bureau), and lastly Seattle, 684,451(Schlosser). Los Angeles and New York City, both have the highest estimated illegal population, and population census. So, if they do not put some effort in by making immigrants follow the legal process to become a citizen in the United States, then ICE will come and start deporting illegals which could decline Los Angeles, and New York City’s population drastically. Well, actually most city administrators think it is politically correct to have Sanctuary cities regardless of the consequences are looming around because it is a political agenda that Democrats favor more than the Republicans. Illegal Immigration and the

He talks about how “Trumps executive order does far more than removing illegal immigrants with criminal records, it threatens to cut federal funding’s from nearly 300 Sanctuary Jurisdictions” he says that the sanctuary cities shouldn’t deny what he offers because they will lose millions of dollars from funding’s. “Trumps threats must be taken seriously” Austin says. I think that this is a good point but I disagree because, even though this may cause a great impact in these cities there are many cities that are receiving other help from other funds. Other places like Santa Fe as I talked earlier the mayor said that the funds are not a big portion of what they have. This means that they could just work with what they have left. There are also the tax payers. Many people think that immigrants don’t pay their taxes, but they do. This immigrant work all year and pay all of their taxes. Except they don’t get anything back because since they are undocumented they are not eligible to file for their taxes. This money stays with the government, and helps pay all of the expenses, like school, and police departments. I think that the Sanctuary cities will be fine without this

Can sanctuary cities be effective in both the policing and protection of undocumented citizens and if so, how will they regulate the population in question? A main issue being displayed here is a lack of standardized regulations being set by sanctuary cities. Instead of setting a precedent of resisting government immigration policies, these efforts would better have spent towards setting up and promoting programs that assist illegal immigrants in becoming American citizens. This paper will look at articles regarding sanctuary cities from Slate, Vox and the Wall Street Journal and decide which has the strongest argument.

In the article “Sanctuary Cities Violate Law and Common Sense” (1-3) Robert Ehrlich writes that citizens of sanctuary cities are in danger and change is essential. First, Ehrlich accuses democrats of no longer being concerned with immigration law along with progressives being arrogant. Then the author urges citizens to not let Kate Steinle’s death be in vain. Furthermore, the author urges government to end support of sanctuary cities. The most interesting point Ehrlich presented was “it’s as though federal immigration law has been reduced to a discretionary set of suggestions” (Ehrlich 2). In conclusion, the author reveals that sanctuary cities need change by not only citizens but also government to prevent future casualties.

“If Portland continues to declare itself as a Sanctuary City, programs that help some of our most vulnerable residents may be harmed the most.” One of Portland's current responsibilities is to decide if it should be declared an official sanctuary city. Although the name ‘sanctuary city’ doesn't have an exact definition, for Portland it basically means that the local law enforcement would be asked to not report undocumented immigrants to the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). At first glance this might seem like not much of a problem, but it is. Due to an executive order passed by President Trump it was made clear that sanctuary cities, “are not eligible to receive federal grants, except as deemed necessary for law enforcement purposes.”

The concept of sanctuary has existed since ancient times. There has always been a desire in communities across the world to provide hospitality to those in need. Whether it be providing shelter in a shrine in ancient Greece, or allowing the wrongly accused to hide away in churches during the middle ages in central Europe, refuge has come in many forms throughout history and across the world to protect people unjustly in trouble with the law. This concept has wormed itself into policy and local government as cities across America have created laws and loopholes that allow refugees and illegal immigrants to bypass unfair deportation policies that don’t account for circumstance. Even though these sanctuary cities have been around for decades,

In 2010, there were 11.2 million undocumented and illegal immigrants in the United States, making it a serious political and economic issue (Cebula, 2016). There are certain cities in the United States that do not have specific policies for illegal immigrants. Sanctuary cities are cities, counties, states, or local jurisdictions that limit how local law enforcement and federal immigration agents cooperate with another, as well as, do not ask about a person’s immigration status (Lee et al, 2014). After researching about sanctuary cities, it seems that the sanctuary cities allow illegal immigrants to get away with crime, serving little to no jail time. If someone from the United States was to commit a crime in another country, there is not a such thing as a sanctuary city.

According to the article, the sanctuary cities, officials declared to act against mass deportations in a bulwark manner, even at losing the federal finances for local services. The situation has happened in New York where there is a large population of the Latinos. The leaders have pledged not to cooperate with immigration agents saying that the city will always be a sanctuary city. The essay is a summary of the article with views regarding the states and the cities trying to help illegal migrants in case they are faced with deportation.

According to Bardes, Shelley, and Schmidt (2017), “the Tenth Amendment states that the powers not delegated to the united states by the constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states, or to the people.” The 10th Amendment gives the states power to keep sanctuary cities without the authority of the national government, so this gives any state that’s friendly towards immigration to ignore president Trump’s orders. Pro-immigration states have the power of the judicial branch (the courts) to an executive order that attacks them. For example, according to Herskovitz (2017), “A federal court judge in California on Monday blocked an executive order from President Donald Trump to deny some federal grants to so-called sanctuary cities, undermining the administration’s crackdown on illegal

States every year, these illegal immigrants also have a disproportionally high crime rate. The wall and the money to build it will have to be approved by congress so Donald Trump is using due process and not abusing his powers. Donald Trump’s many executive orders he has written in his first year have many people questioning whether or not Trump is abusing his power. This doesn’t really seem to be the case as his power has been checked many times already as the judicial branch has blocked a number of his executive orders they find unconstitutional. So why executive orders are direct orders from the president that become law they can be checked very easily as show. A number of Trump’s executive orders have be blocked on the grounds that they are violating the rights of illegal immigrants and that even though they are not citizens of the

Trumps executive order says that threatens to take federal funding from any state that tries to gain trust with they’re immigrants residents, that is against the