The modern American "sanctuary movement" began in the early 80s.
A time when the US government was warier about the hazards of Latino immigration.
Thousands of Central American asylum seekers were rejected by the American government,
So so-called "sanctuary churches" stepped in to offer them protection
and before you knew it, there was more Latino migration.
Today, "sanctuary churches" have been superseded by "sanctuary counties";
about 633 of them. Broadly speaking a sanctuary city or county is a place where
if the authorities happen to arrest an illegal immigrant they don't keep them under arrest any longer
than they need to. So the Feds can't come and get them.
Now you might wonder why cities wouldn't just help the Feds deport these illegal immigrants.
Well, the theory is it's because in many places illegal immigrants are actually part of the community.
Over 60% of illegal immigrants have been in America for over 10 years.
Over 30% of them own homes, and about a third of illegal immigrant adults have American-born children.
In 2015 illegal immigrants paid US$23 billion in federal taxes, and US$12 billion in state and local taxes.
And as far as crime goes, less than 3% of illegal immigrants have committed felonies, compared to 6% of the overall population.
Maybe that's why, in a recent CNN poll, 90% of people wanted to provide a path to citizenship
for English-speaking illegal immigrants with a job. And that included 87% of Republicans.
In fact, according to McClatchy, even 72% of Trump's supporters favour a path to citizenship.
Added to that, if illegal immigrants are afraid to talk to the police, because they think they'll get deported,
then if they have knowledge of a serious crime being committed they might not testify.
Houston Police recently announced a 42% drop in Hispanics reporting rapes since last year,
and a 13% drop in them reporting violent crime.
Now these are all convincing arguments, but Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly also makes a good argument.
The law is the law.
[Kelly] If lawmakers do not like the laws that we enforce... then they should have the courage and the skill
to change those laws. Otherwise they should shut up and support the men and women on the front lines.
Which brings us to Trump's Executive Order about sanctuary cities, summed up by Jeff Sessions this way.
[Sessions] The Department of Justice will also take all lawful steps to claw back any funds awarded
to a jurisdiction that wilfully violates (Section) 1373.
So if a sanctuary city breaks "Section 1373" it gets defunded. But what the hell is Section 1373?
Well that quote won't help you much, it's a mess, but it basically says that a city can't stop an employee
informing the Feds about an illegal immigrant if they want to.
So it may suit Jeff Sessions to talk tough about defunding sanctuary cities,
and it may suit Democrats to cry about how mean Trump and Jeff Sessions are being,
but sanctuary cities are not going to be defunded for protecting illegal immigrants.
Only potentially for banning employees from talking to the Feds, which most sanctuary cities simply do not do.
Furthermore, the government couldn't force cities to help them round up illegal immigrants even if they wanted to.
In Printz vs United States Justice Scalia said the Federal Government may not command the states to administer or enforce a federal regulatory program.
In other words, they can't make cities do their job for them.
Even in a court injunction granted against the Trump Administration last week, the judge specifically said
the injunction simply prohibited the Government from doing something that was plainly unconstitutional
that they weren't even trying to do.
So in summary, the Trump administration isn't trying to stop sanctuary cities, it couldn't stop them if it tried,
and there's a court injunction stopping them from even trying, which they're not.
Makes you want to go back to a simpler time, when things were more like...
Actually, maybe not!