Thursday, June 30, 2022
Bill King Blog
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • About Bill
  • Policy Discussion
  • Categories
  • Tune in
  • Home
  • About Bill
  • Policy Discussion
  • Categories
  • Tune in
No Result
View All Result
Bill King Blog
No Result
View All Result
Home Immigration

What is a Sanctuary City?

by Bill King Policy
August 2, 2017
in Immigration
10
Quote of the Week – Will Rogers on the Democratic Party
Share this article
  
     Today’s world of 24-hour, partisan-slaved cable networks and an ideologically re-enforcing blogosphere is dominated by catch phrases that frequently create more obfuscation than illumination.  The term “sanctuary city” is exactly such a catch phrase.
     What does it really mean to be a “sanctuary city?”  There are really only two public policy issues that are relevant to this issue.
     The first issue relates to the procedures followed when a person is taken into custody.   When that happens, most law enforcement agencies attempt to make some determination about the immigration status of the person.
 
     Making that determination is not as straight forward as one may think.  About 40% of the individuals in the country illegally came here under a valid visa that has expired.  Those visas are frequently extended.  Attempting to determine if a visa has been extended or not is not a simple matter.  Similarly, under the Citizenship Act of 2000, if a child has one parent that is U.S. citizen, they are automatically eligible for citizenship under certain circumstances even if they were not born in the U.S.  And, of course, under President Obama’s executive order, persons here illegally, but brought here as children are not subject to deportation under certain circumstances.  President Trump recently extended that executive order.  The result is that, in many cases, you need an immigration lawyer to figure out if a person is in the country legally or not.
 
     If it is determined that a person in custody is in the country illegally, that information is passed along to ICE.  Federal law prohibits cities from banning this type of communication between their police departments and ICE.
 
     In most cases ICE does nothing with this information because it does not have the resources to deport every person here illegally.  Normally ICE focuses only on those with a criminal record.  In that case, ICE may request that the city hold the person until ICE can pick them up.  Interestingly, there is no requirement in federal law for the city to hold a person for ICE, but most do so voluntarily.
 
     However, some cities, like Austin and San Francisco have refused to cooperate with ICE and detain prisoners in their custody.  Some have attempted to parse the issue by holding only prisoners who have been arrested for a serious offense.
 
    SB4, the immigration law recently enacted by the Texas Legislature, requires cities to honor ICE detainer requests.  It is hard for me to see the argument against this requirement.  I am surprised federal law does not already require it.  It is absurd for a city to release a person in custody that ICE has identified for deportation, requiring ICE to then track them back down.
 
     Some have argued that ICE is targeting individuals that pose no real threat.  I have not seen any data on the type of crimes committed by those ICE is deporting, but it seems unlikely given their limited resources ICE is wasting its time with minor offenses.  But regardless cities should not be in the business of second guessing ICE’s determinations about who should be deported.
 
     The second issue is more complicated and deals with the procedures for when a police officer can and should inquire about a person’s immigration status.  Many police departments, including Houston, have a policy that prohibits police officers from asking a person about their immigration status until that person is taken into custody.  Interestingly, until a few years ago, the Texas Department of Public Safety had the same policy.  SB4 prohibits cities from keeping its police officers from inquiring about a person’s immigration status if that person is lawfully “detained.”
 
     “Detention” is different from being arrested.  When a police officer pulls you over for a traffic violation, you have been detained.  So, this controversy is really about whether police officers are going to inquire about immigration status when a person is stopped for an otherwise legitimate reason, like a taillight being out.
 
     The problem arises in trying to determine which individuals who have been detained, i.e., stopped, will be asked about their immigration status.  The Supreme Court has consistently ruled that police cannot discriminate during traffic stops based on race or nationality.  And, in fact, SB4 prohibits a police officer from using “race, color, religion, language or national origin” as a basis for asking about a person’s immigration status.
     So exactly how is a police officer going to decide who to ask about their immigration status without considering the person’s nationality or language?  Anytime an officer asks about immigration status, he or she is opening themselves up to a civil rights lawsuit.
 
     And there is another problem.  Let’s assume that an officer stops a person for speeding and during the stop that person admits that they are not in the country legally.  What then?
 
     If the officer arrests the person for being in the country illegally, there is literally nothing to do with the person.  The County jail will not take them.  ICE will not take them.  In fact, there is a complicated legal issue as to whether local police officers even have the lawful Constitutional authority to make arrests under federal immigration law in the first place.  So, what is the point of asking?
 
     The bottom line is that local police are not going to be asking detainees about their immigration status except in very extraordinary circumstances, SB4 notwithstanding.
 
   Immigrate advocates argue police officers asking about immigration status will chill immigrants from reporting crimes and being willing to be witnesses in criminal cases.  SB4 attempts to deal with that issue by prohibiting officers from asking crime victims or witnesses about their immigration status.
 
     There have been several reports that the number of crimes being reported by the immigrant community has declined recently.  Opponents of SB4 have attributed this decline to the bill’s passage which seems pretty far-fetched, considering it has not even gone into effect.  I have no doubt there is a decline, but that is more likely caused by the overall tone of the of national immigration debate, not one specific bill.
 
     The bottom line is that SB4 is going to have little effect either way on the immigration challenges we are facing.  Texas, like other jurisdictions, has entered the immigration fray out of frustration with Congress’ inability to act.  There is no question that allowing millions to enter the country illegally over the last three decades has caused many problems: accidents with uninsured motorists, criminal gangs slipping into the country with immigrants coming here to work, overcrowded schools and public hospitals . . . the list goes on and on.  Congress’ failure to enact comprehensive reform is an inexcusable dereliction of their duty.
 
     The principal elements for such reform are clear and supported by an overwhelming majority of Americans.  Secure the border.  Provide a procedure for those here illegally, but are contributing and not criminals, to get legal or get out.  Create an enforceable temporary worker program.  Set reasonable annual immigration quotas.  It is not rocket science.
 
     But until Congress acts expect more SB4s, more litigation, more hardship for US citizens forced to  deal with the problems caused by illegal immigration, more uncertainty for immigrants, and more acrimony over a problem that is 100% self-inflicted by our worthless, do-nothing Congress.
[If you would like to be added to my distribution list, please send me your email address at weking@weking.net.  Also, previous emails are posted at www.BillKingBlog.net]
 

ShareTweet

Bill King Policy

Related Posts

Almost 80% of Refugees Admitted in 2019 Were Christians Fleeing Persecution
Faith

Almost 80% of Refugees Admitted in 2019 Were Christians Fleeing Persecution

January 27, 2020
Quote of the Week – Will Rogers on the Democratic Party
Immigration

The DACA Dilemma

September 9, 2017
Quote of the Week – Will Rogers on the Democratic Party
Immigration

Not Everyone Concerned about Illegal Immigration is a Racist

September 9, 2017
Load More
Next Post
Quote of the Week – Will Rogers on the Democratic Party

Initial Thoughts on Harvey

Comments 10

  1. ig says:
    5 years ago

    Just want to say your article is as astounding. The clearness on your put up
    is simply nice and i can suppose you are knowledgeable
    on this subject. Fine along with your permission allow me to take hold of your feed to keep updated with imminent post.
    Thank you 1,000,000 and please keep up the gratifying work.

    Reply
    • Jan Cobler says:
      3 years ago

      Bill, I have re read this due to a converstion with a person who is for TB (because she thinks you are FOR Sanctuary Cities because of the excerpt in the Chronicle labeling you as a Lefty). Oh Lordy… This is, as usual, a very clear and well thought out explanation.

      So, when someone who has not read this and is not conversant with all of the attendant problems asks:” What is your stance on sanctuary Cities?”; what is your response? Because it sounds to me, if I understand you correctly, that in essence we and every other city are already “Sanctuary cities” in that there is no clear rule of law regarding this issue. Where to put them if ICE won’t take them, sort of thing? To start with “it is a very complicated issue” could possibly sound like prevarication.

      Thank you.

      Reply
      • Bill King says:
        3 years ago

        City should honor ICE detainers and deportation warrants and not interfere with ICE executing them.
        HPD should not be attempting to enforce immigration laws. Not qualified, they dont want to do it because too busy already.
        City should cooperate with ICE raids where there is a clear public safety issue, e.g., raiding a stash house for individuals being trafficked.

        Reply
  2. ig says:
    5 years ago

    Just want to say your article is as astounding. The clearness on your put up
    is simply nice and i can suppose you are knowledgeable
    on this subject. Fine along with your permission allow me to take hold of your feed to keep updated with imminent post.
    Thank you 1,000,000 and please keep up the gratifying work.

    Reply
  3. Armani Williamson says:
    5 years ago

    Magnificent web site. A lot of helpful information here. I am sending it to some pals ans additionally sharing in delicious. And obviously, thanks for your sweat!

    Reply
  4. Armani Williamson says:
    5 years ago

    Magnificent web site. A lot of helpful information here. I am sending it to some pals ans additionally sharing in delicious. And obviously, thanks for your sweat!

    Reply
  5. professional carpet cleaners says:
    5 years ago

    Very good info. Lucky me I ran across your blog by
    chance (stumbleupon). I’ve book marked it for later!

    Reply
  6. professional carpet cleaners says:
    5 years ago

    Very good info. Lucky me I ran across your blog by
    chance (stumbleupon). I’ve book marked it for later!

    Reply
  7. Silvia Odete Morani Massad says:
    5 years ago

    Heya i’m for the primary time here. I found this board and I to find It really helpful & it helped me out much.
    I hope to give one thing back and help others like you aided me.

    Reply
  8. Silvia Odete Morani Massad says:
    5 years ago

    Heya i’m for the primary time here. I found this board and I to find It really helpful & it helped me out much.
    I hope to give one thing back and help others like you aided me.

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

By Categories

  • Book Review
  • City Of Houston Finances
  • Climate Change
  • COVID-19
  • Crime
  • Demographics
  • Economics
  • Election Reform
  • Environment
  • Ethics
  • Faith
  • Federal Government Finances
  • Flooding
  • Gun Violence
  • Harris County
  • Harvey Recovery
  • homeblog
  • Human Trafficking
  • Hurricane Preparation
  • Ike Dike
  • Immigration
  • Kingwood
  • Management Districts
  • Media
  • Mobility
  • Montrose Management District
  • National Economy
  • National Economy
  • National Politics
  • Pensions
  • Police Polices & Procedures
  • Police Policies & Procedures
  • Political Parties
  • Property Taxes
  • Public Health
  • Quote of the Week
  • Race
  • Rebuild Houston
  • Rebuild Houston – Drainage Fee
  • SAM Party
  • Social Security
  • State of Texas
  • State of Texas Finances
  • TIRZ
  • Uncategorized
  • Uptown
  • Utility Grid
Bill King Blog

Posts range from local to national issues and focus on fact-based analysis, avoiding hyperbole and partisanship. The site is intended to be an open, respectful discussion of the critical issues of our day. Contact Bill directly and let him know what matters to you - weking@weking.net

Recent News

  • Suicide in America
  • Gun Deaths in America by the Numbers

Our Social Media

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • About Bill
  • Policy Discussion
  • Categories
  • Tune in