WikiLeaks Document Release
February 2, 2009
Congressional Research ServiceReport RS22773
”Sanctuary Cities”: Legal Issues
Yule Kim and Michael John Garcia, American Law DivisionJanuary 9, 2008
Abstract.
In the 110th Congress, several bills have been introduced that attempt to limit formal or informalsanctuary policies and induce greater sharing of immigration information by state and local authorities. Thesebills include H.R. 1355, H.R. 3494, H.R. 4192, H.R. 4065, S. 850, and S. 2294.
h t t p : / / w i k i l e a k s . o r g / w i k i / C R S - R S 2 2 7 7 3
1
See CRS Report RL33874,
Unauthorized Aliens Residing in the United States: Estimates Since
(continued...)
Order Code RS22773Updated January 9, 2008
“Sanctuary Cities”: Legal Issues
Yule Kim and Michael John GarciaLegislative AttorneysAmerican Law Division
Summary
Controversy has arisen over the existence of so-called “sanctuary cities.” The term“sanctuary city” is not defined by federal law, but it is often used to refer to thoselocalities which, as a result of a state or local act, ordinance, policy, or fiscal constraints,limit their assistance to federal immigration authorities seeking to apprehend andremove unauthorized aliens. Supporters of such policies argue that many cities havehigher priorities, and that local efforts to deter the presence of unauthorized aliens wouldundermine community relations, disrupt municipal services, interfere with local lawenforcement, or violate humanitarian principles. Opponents argue that sanctuary policiesencourage illegal immigration and undermine federal enforcement efforts. Pursuant to§ 434 of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996(PRWORA, P.L. 104-193) and § 642 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and ImmigrantResponsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA, P.L. 104-208), states and localities may not limittheir governmental entities or officers from maintaining records regarding a person’simmigration status, or bar the exchange of such information with any federal, state, orlocal entity. Reportedly, some jurisdictions with sanctuary policies take a “don’t ask,don’t tell” approach, where officials are barred from inquiring about a person’simmigration status in certain circumstances. Though this method does not directlyconflict with federal requirements that states and localities permit the free exchange of information regarding persons’ immigration status, it results in specified agencies orofficers not possessing information that they could potentially share with federalimmigration authorities. In the 110
th
Congress, several bills have been introduced thatattempt to limit formal or informal sanctuary policies and induce greater sharing of immigration information by state and local authorities. These bills include H.R. 1355,H.R. 3494, H.R. 4192,
H.R. 4065, S. 850, and S. 2294.Over the past several years, the number of aliens who unlawfully reside in the UnitedStates has grown significantly, from an estimated 3.2 million in 1986 to more than 11million in 2005.
1
Although the federal government is responsible for regulating the entry
h t t p : / / w i k i l e a k s . o r g / w i k i / C R S - R S 2 2 7 7 3
CRS-2
1
(...continued)
1986
, by Ruth Ellen Wasem.
See also
Jeffrey S. Passel, Pew Hispanic Center,
The Size and Characteristics of the Unauthorized Migrant Population in the U.S.: Estimates Based on the March 2005 Current Population Survey
, March 7, 2006.
2
See
the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) § 287(g), 8 U.S.C. § 1357(g). For additionalbackground, see CRS Report RL32270,
Enforcing Immigration Law: The Role of State and Local Law Enforcement
, by Blas Nuñez-Neto, Michael John Garcia, and Karma Ester.
3
Many recent local ordinances restricting unauthorized aliens’ access to housing andemployment have been subject to legal challenge.
See, e.g.
, Lozano v. City of Hazleton, 496F.Supp.2d 477 (M.D.Pa. 2007) (striking down an ordinance restricting the housing oremployment of unauthorized aliens on preemption and Fourteenth Amendment grounds).
4
See
Jesse McKinley,
Immigrant Protection Rules Draw Fire
, NY
T
IMES
, November 12, 2006.
5
U.S. Department of Justice, Office of the Inspector General, Audit Division, C
OOPERATION OF
SCAAP
R
ECIPIENTS IN THE
R
EMOVAL OF
C
RIMINAL
A
LIENS FROM THE
U
NITED
S
TATES
, January2007 (redacted public version) [
hereinafter
“2007 OIG Report”], at 44 (defining “sanctuary”policies).
and removal of aliens from the United States, the impact of unauthorized immigration hasarguably been felt most directly in the communities where aliens settle. The response of states and localities to the influx of illegal immigrants has varied. On one end of thespectrum, some jurisdictions have actively sought to deter the presence of illegalimmigrants within their territory. Some jurisdictions have assisted federal authorities inapprehending and detaining unauthorized aliens, including pursuant to agreements (287(g)agreements) with federal immigration authorities enabling respective state or local lawenforcement agencies to carry out various immigration enforcement functions.
2
Morecontroversially, some jurisdictions have sought to deter illegal immigration by imposingtheir own restrictions upon unauthorized aliens’ access to housing, employment, ormunicipal services.
3
Moving toward the middle of the spectrum, some states andlocalities communicate with federal immigration enforcement officers under limitedcircumstances (e.g., after arresting an unauthorized alien for a criminal offense), but forvarious reasons do not take a more active role in deterring illegal immigration.At the other end of the spectrum, some jurisdictions have been unwilling to assist thefederal government in enforcing measures that distinguish between legal and non-legalresidents of the community. Some of these jurisdictions have adopted formal or informalpolicies limiting cooperation with federal immigration authorities.
4
This latter categoryof jurisdictions is sometimes referred to as “sanctuary cities.” Although this term is notdefined by federal statute or regulation, it has been used by some in reference to“jurisdictions that may have state laws, local ordinances, or departmental policies limitingthe role of local law enforcement agencies and officers in the enforcement of immigrationlaws.”
5
The very existence of “sanctuary cities” has been the subject of considerablecontroversy. Supporters argue that immigration enforcement is the responsibility of thefederal government, and that local efforts to deter the presence of unauthorized alienswould undermine community relations, disrupt municipal services, interfere with local
Search History:
Result 00 of 00
00 results for result for
p.
Notes
Load more
