Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 29, 2024 Mon
Time: 11:24 pm
Time: 11:24 pm
Results for sanctuary city
6 results foundAuthor: Lee, Jennifer J. Title: Redefining the Legality of Undocumented Work Summary: Undocumented workers face a new harsh reality under the Trump administration. Federal laws' prohibition of undocumented work has facilitated exploitation because workers fear being brought to the attention of immigration authorities. The current administration's aggressive stance towards worksite enforcement will only exacerbate abuses against undocumented workers, such as wage theft, dangerous working conditions, or human trafficking. Given the current climate, this article explores how states and localities can resist the federal prohibition by legalizing undocumented work. We live in times of resistance, with "sanctuary cities" that refuse to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement. Seizing on this moment, state and local resistance can offer more immediate accountability for addressing the plight of undocumented workers while disrupting the ways in which the federal immigration framework defines the illegality of undocumented work. To start, this article reviews how the incongruence between the lived experiences of undocumented workers and the federal immigration framework creates an underclass of workers. Next, it develops a typology of state and local resistance measures that recognize, protect, or promote undocumented work and considers whether these measures can succeed given concerns about federalism and governmental retaliation. This article concludes by discussing why state and local resistance is worthwhile. Beyond the palpable benefits of addressing exploitation, state and local resistance can help undocumented workers overcome exclusion by increasing their sense of belonging. Community members too benefit from the strengthening of workers' rights and the contributions to the local economy. At the same time, such resistance changes social norms and provides a powerful critique of the federal prohibition on undocumented work. Ultimately, this article is the first to examine how state and local resistance focused on undocumented work can lend itself to building social movements that promote immigrant inclusion by redefining the legality of undocumented work. Details: California, 2017. 33p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 14, 2018 at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3040872 Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: file:///C:/Users/AuthUser/Downloads/SSRN-id3040872.pdf Shelf Number: 151546 Keywords: Immigrant WorkersImmigrationSanctuary CityUndocumented workers |
Author: Avila, Krsna Title: The Rise of the Sanctuary: Getting Local Officers Out of the Business of Deportations in the Trump Era Summary: Juxtaposed against the Statue of Liberty's promise of refuge to "the huddled masses, yearning to breathe free" lies another reality: immigration policy in the United States has long been fraught with racial tension and dictated by an uneasy fear of "the other." From the Chinese Exclusion Act and the Mexican Bracero program of the past to the Muslim ban and elimination of Temporary Protected Status of the present, history has shown that the work of immigrant justice and racial justice are inextricably linked. Since the first week of the Trump administration, the federal government has launched a racist and mean-spirited attack on immigrants and those who support and welcome them, all in the aim of satisfying Trump's steadfast campaign promise to "deport them all" as a way to "make America great again." With a budget of over $18 billion - more than all other federal law enforcement agencies combined - the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) detention and deportation machine is vast and dangerous. But it also relies heavily on the voluntary assistance of local governments, particularly local law enforcement agencies, to remove individuals from the families and livelihoods they have built in the U.S. Localities have no legal authority to enforce immigration laws and no legal obligation to assist DHS with its immigration enforcement actions. Yet local assistance with federal immigration work continues across the country. Three out of every four counties will voluntarily detain individuals at the request of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Threats and attempts to deny federal grants to "sanctuary jurisdictions" - loosely identified as those who enact policies limiting involvement of their local law enforcement agencies in immigration enforcement - have been key strategies in Trump's anti-immigrant agenda. From executive order pronouncements and Department of Justice (DOJ) policy decisions to near weekly public speeches invoking threats against and denunciations of sanctuary policies, the administration has sought to force localities to help carry out its increased deportation efforts, pushing local agencies to prioritize federal immigration enforcement over their own community concerns - and seeking to punish those who rightfully refuse to be involved. However, efforts to thwart sanctuary policies have failed in a number of ways. During 2017, local policies limiting involvement with ICE expanded in spite of, and sometimes because of, the hateful anti-immigrant rhetoric and policy changes in the Trump Administration. Over 400 counties now have stronger limitations on engaging in immigration enforcement than they did a year ago. Under pressure from community members and advocates, cities, counties, and states across the country enacted new laws and policies disengaging with federal immigration enforcement in a variety of manners, from restricting ICE access within their jails to refusing to honor ICE detainers, which are requests to detain someone for apprehension by ICE - a detention that federal courts continue to find unconstitutional. Federal courts have also ruled against other unconstitutional overreaches by the federal government, issuing new rulings on the strict limits of local authority in immigration enforcement and preventing the administration from stripping federal funding to sanctuary jurisdictions. In 2018, strengthening and expanding local sanctuary policies will be crucial to resisting the anti-immigrant Trump agenda. Though we recognize that sanctuary policies alone are not sufficient to prevent deportations, we hope that their adoption continues and increases over the Trump administration's second year. The Immigrant Legal Resource Center (ILRC) will continue our work to support and advise local advocates and city, county, and state government bodies across the country to fight back against unjust detention and deportations and to protect immigrant rights. Details: Immigrant Legal Resource Center, 2018. 32p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 14, 2018 at: https://www.ilrc.org/sites/default/files/resources/rise_of_sanctuary-lg-20180201.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: https://www.ilrc.org/sites/default/files/resources/rise_of_sanctuary-lg-20180201.pdf Shelf Number: 151528 Keywords: Department of Homeland SecurityIllegal ImmigrationImmigrationImmigration Customs EnforcementImmigration PolicySanctuary City |
Author: Hannan, Charity-Ann Title: Towards a Sanctuary Province: Policies, Programs, and Services for Illegalized Immigrants' Equitable Employment, Social Participation, and Economic Development Summary: Given contemporary federal migration policies, Canada can expect increasing numbers of immigrants who do not possess legal status. The exploitation of these "illegalized" immigrants in the labour market affects wages and labour standards for all Canadians. To mitigate the negative effects of federal immigration policies, Toronto and Hamilton have declared themselves sanctuary cities. In this working paper, we explore initiatives that could be applied at the provincial and territorial scale to enhance access to employment for illegalized immigrants. After conducting a scoping analysis of the literature, we conclude that provinces and territories could implement a range of programs, policies, and service deliveries. Details: Canada, 2015. 24p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 14, 2018 at: https://www.ryerson.ca/content/dam/rcis/documents/RCIS_WP_Hannan_Bauder_No_2015_3.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Canada URL: https://www.ryerson.ca/content/dam/rcis/documents/RCIS_WP_Hannan_Bauder_No_2015_3.pdf Shelf Number: 151548 Keywords: Illegal Immigration Immigration Immigration Policy Sanctuary City |
Author: Wang, Shuguang Title: (No) Access T.O.: A Pilot Study on Sanctuary City Policy in Toronto Canada Summary: The "sanctuary city" movement is a grassroots, human rights-based response to increased numbers of non-status migrants living and working in global cities (Faraday 2012; Sawchuk & Kempf 2008; Bhuyan 2012; OCASI 2012). Non-status migrants live in situations of extreme precariousness - they are subject to detention and deportation if identified by federal authorities; often work in poor conditions; are socially isolated; face poverty, abuse, and exploitation; and are unable to safely access essential social services, including those related to public health, education, labour, shelters, food banks, and police services (Gibney 2000; De Giorgi 2010; Noll 2010). In February 2013, Toronto became the first "sanctuary city" in Canada, which is currently styled "Access T.O." Hamilton and Vancouver followed suit in 2014 and 2016, respectively. The primary objective of Access T.O. is to ensure that all residents are able to access municipal and police services, regardless of immigration status. The policy directs city officials not to: 1) inquire into immigration status when providing select services, 2) deny non-status residents access to services to which they are entitled, and 3) share personal or identifying information with federal authorities, unless required to do so by federal or provincial law (City of Toronto 2013). There are many questions surrounding Access T.O., not the least of which: is it working? The answer to this question depends very much on what one takes the goals of the policy to be, as well as what measures of success one employs. Is the policy concerned with providing access to municipal services i.e. local bureaucratic membership (de Graauw 2014)? Does it have a larger, multijurisdictional significance, helping advocates challenge exclusionary federal (and provincial) laws? Does it have a more local or even transnational, non-state significance, shifting ideas around community, belonging, and political relationships? (McDonald 2012:143)? The purpose of this paper is to share the results of a pilot study that explored whether Access T.O. is working. For approximately one year, we conducted legal, policy, and qualitative research into what barriers are the most significant and how they may be removed. Our qualitative research included interviews with 24 stakeholders, including City officials, Community Service Organizations (CSOs), NGOs, professionals (e.g. physicians, lawyers), and non-status migrants. Although the study was concerned with Access T.O. in all of three of the above-mentioned senses, this working paper places the policy primarily in the context of access to City services, and not so much in the broader contexts of federal/provincial law or shifting political identities, interests, and relationships. Access T.O. began as a symbolically ambitious but practically cautious policy - and it remains so. Despite major newspaper headlines circulated at the time, City Council never fully committed itself to a sanctuary city policy. By "reaffirming" the City's commitment to non-status residents, Council seems to have thought that the policy was more or less informally in place already. It then called on various City officials to report back on the financial and resource costs of additional measures, including training and community outreach, but has yet to provide any additional funding of note. Finally, it called on the provincial and federal governments to shoulder their share of responsibility for more systematic legislative and policy change, but has not yet entered into a dialogue with either government on the subject. After this series of pronouncements, Council has been relatively inactive in this area. In these respects, it may be more accurate to view Access T.O. as a pilot project than as a full policy. We argue that it is time for Council to commit itself to the policy, including by providing the funding and mandate for: more comprehensive training tailored to specific Divisions, dedicated Access T.O. portfolios within many (if not all) City divisions, "service integration" geared towards better community engagement and capacity-building, and revisiting the City's position on the collection and protection of demographic data. The paper will begin by placing Access T.O. in jurisdictional context, including its demographic and historical background. We will then provide an overview of the nature and origins of Access T.O. We then shift to the research project, outlining out methodology and analyzing select themes that arose during our interviews. Embedded within these interpretations will be recommendations aimed at improving the effectiveness of Access T.O. Details: Canada, 2017. 39p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 14, 2018 at: https://www.ryerson.ca/content/dam/rcis/documents/RCIS%20Working%20Paper%202017_1GHudsonFinal%20.pdf Year: 2017 Country: Canada URL: https://www.ryerson.ca/content/dam/rcis/documents/RCIS%20Working%20Paper%202017_1GHudsonFinal%20.pdf Shelf Number: 151549 Keywords: Illegal ImmigrationImmigrationImmigration PolicySanctuary City |
Author: Solomon, Danyelle Title: The Negative Consequences of Entangling Local Policing and Immigration Enforcement Summary: Law enforcement personnel across the nation today are facing complex challenges. Whether it is through interacting with individuals who have mental health or substance abuse issues, dealing with gun crimes, or responding to domestic violence, officers must address difficult realities on a daily basis. In the midst of heightened racial and ethnic tensions, they must tackle these challenges with constrained resources, including limited training, inadequate and outdated police equipment, enormous technological and data gaps, uneven recruitment, and reduced support services for officers. But on top of law enforcement officers' primary mission of keeping their communities safe, President Donald Trump has consistently called for the creation of a "deportation force" to maximize the number of immigrants removed from the country and has proposed a range of efforts that would supercharge the role of state and local law enforcement agencies, or LEAs, in federal immigration enforcement. From signaling plans to aggressively promote the 287(g) program around the country to withholding federal grants from so-called sanctuary jurisdictions, the Trump administration has made clear that it aims to enlist state and local law enforcement in its civil immigration enforcement efforts through both inducement and coercion. State and local elected officials and LEAs are now, or soon will be, faced with a choice: whether and how to assume a greater role in enforcing federal immigration laws. As this issue brief illustrates, exercising that role could lead to significant financial burdens, increased litigation, and diminished public trust - all at the expense of public safety and the general welfare of all members of U.S. communities. Details: Washington, DC: Center for American Progress, 2017. 9p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 21, 2019 at: https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/immigration/reports/2017/03/21/428776/negative-consequences-entangling-local-policing-immigration-enforcement/ Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://cdn.americanprogress.org/content/uploads/2017/03/20140134/LawEnforcementSanctuary-brief.pdf Shelf Number: 154337 Keywords: 287(g) Federal Immigration Enforcement Immigration Immigration Enforcement Law Enforcement Law Enforcement Agencies Local Policing Sanctuary City |
Author: El-Khatib, Stephen Title: State Policy Responses to Sanctuary Cities: Explaining the Rise of Sanctuary City Legislative Proposals Summary: More state policy has been introduced for and against sanctuary municipalities - municipalities that expressly forbid city officials or police departments from inquiring into an individual's immigration status - in the last year alone than in the past ten years combined. Despite this sudden surge of political activity, the introduction of sanctuary-related bills has not occurred evenly across the United States. Analyzing over 150 state bills introduced in the 2016-2017 state legislative session, we examine several factors that might explain legislative activity: 1) Latino Characteristics, 2) Citizen and legislator ideology, 3) State institutions, 4) Crime, and 5) Economic features. We find that the size of the Latino legislative caucus, state-level competition and professionalism, and individual and legislator ideology are key predictors of anti-sanctuary legislation at the state level. Whereas, pro-sanctuary legislation is driven primarily by citizen ideology and the size of the Latino legislative caucus within the state. Details: Riverside, California: Collingwood Research Center, 2017. 34p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 3, 2019 at: http://www.collingwoodresearch.com/uploads/8/3/6/0/8360930/state-policy-responses.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: http://www.collingwoodresearch.com/uploads/8/3/6/0/8360930/state-policy-responses.pdf Shelf Number: 156138 Keywords: Immigrants Immigration Legislation Policy Sanctuary City |