Former President Trump asserts he’ll terminate sanctuary cities using executive powers. During a Fox News town hall, Trump outlined plans to dismantle sanctuary cities. He states sanctuary cities are implemented to protect foreign criminals. Trump will use the Aliens Act of 1798 although courts have previously blocked similar attempts by Trump to defund sanctuary cities.
Trump’s Plan to End Sanctuary Cities
At a recent women’s town hall event, former President Donald Trump pledged to use both executive actions and the Aliens Act of 1798 to end sanctuary cities if reelected. His remark came as a response to concerns raised by Nancy, whose son was killed by an undocumented immigrant. Trump criticized the lawlessness in Democrat-led urban areas, presenting himself as a candidate committed to restoring law and order. By giving local law enforcement the needed authority, he aims to tackle crime in these regions.
Trump’s previous attempts to cut funding for sanctuary cities, however, faced legal hurdles. In 2017, a California judge issued a nationwide injunction blocking his executive order, a move supported by cities like San Francisco and Santa Clara County which argued the order violated local sovereignty.
💥👏🏼President Trump says he will end Sanctuary cities immediately by executive order.
“Sanctuary cities are really meant for one thing: to protect criminals — that’s what they’ve become. We’re going to end all sanctuary cities in the U.S. and go back to normalcy.” pic.twitter.com/g8VLvcsKvk
— 🌴♥️🇺🇸Dixie ♥️s America & Trump🇺🇸♥️🌴 (@DixiDarlen) October 16, 2024
Legal and Political Obstacles
A US District Judge, William Orrick, ruled in favor of the sanctuary cities, asserting that the cities were likely to succeed in their constitutional challenge against Trump’s order to defund them. The decision highlighted the contentious nature of federal versus local government powers, a debate that has long been fueled by the varied definitions and implementations of “sanctuary” policies.
Despite the legal setbacks, Trump’s administration had criticized these rulings, suggesting they endangered public safety and undermined federal laws. Additionally, Trump’s commitment to penalizing local law enforcement for non-compliance with federal immigration laws remains a core part of his rhetoric as he campaigns again. However, his approach is met with mixed opinions, considering research indicates undocumented immigrants are less likely to commit serious crimes compared to those born in the US.
Future Implications
The lack of a clear legal definition for sanctuary cities complicates enforcement efforts. Trump’s plan to end sanctuary cities by withholding federal funding faces challenges due to differing policies regarding cooperation with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Many jurisdictions avoid detaining individuals for ICE over legal concerns such as potential lawsuits for illegal detention.
Local cooperation with ICE varies significantly, often influenced by the severity of a crime or judicial orders. This complexity underscores the ongoing constitutional debate over the role of local law enforcement in immigration enforcement. Opinions also vary among law enforcement officials themselves, with some advocating for greater collaboration with ICE while others prioritize protecting community trust and public safety.
