Earlier today, the Brennan Center (NYU) published my article on “Sanctuary Policies in a Federal System.” It describes what state immigration sanctuary policies are, their constitutional basis, how they might hamper Trump’s mass deportation policies, and how he can try to get around them. I also draw parallels with conservative “gun sanctuaries.” Here is an excerpt from the introduction:
President Donald Trump’s new administration has made a high priority of pursuing mass deportation of undocumented immigrants. It has also stripped hundreds of thousands of legal migrants of status, thus making them eligible for deportation.
If fully implemented, the administration’s deportation agenda may consign hundreds of thousands of migrants to poverty, oppression, and sometimes even death in their countries of origin, such as Cubans and Venezuelans fleeing brutal authoritarian socialist regimes. It could also gravely damage the U.S. economy by deporting a large part of its labor force.
Over the last decade, “sanctuary” jurisdictions have become a focus of political and legal controversy. Sanctuary policies are adopted by state and local governments that refuse to aid federal officials in enforcing particular types of federal laws, including immigration restrictions and gun control regulations.
Sanctuary policies have their flaws and limitations, and the Trump administration may be able to use various means to at least partly get around them. But sanctuaries also have strong constitutional grounding and can help mitigate the harmful effects of his immigration policies.
The post My New Brennan Center Article on "Sanctuary Policies in a Federal System" appeared first on Reason.com.
