Sanctuary Cities: A Violation of Federal Law and Immigration Policy

Sanctuary cities contradict federal law, undermine national security, and incentivize illegal immigration by shielding unauthorized aliens from detection and deportation. Title 8, U.S.C. § 1324(a) clearly establishes that harbouring, transporting, or encouraging illegal immigration is a criminal offence. Additionally, the Supremacy Clause dictates that federal immigration law supersedes local policies, making sanctuary city ordinances legally indefensible. Policymakers and law enforcement agencies must recognize that immigration enforcement is not a discretionary matter—it is a federal mandate and adherence to the law is imperative to maintaining national sovereignty and public safety.

Sanctuary cities, which limit cooperation with federal immigration enforcement, operate in direct conflict with established U.S. law. Under Title 8, U.S.C. § 1324(a), multiple provisions criminalize the harbouring, transportation, and concealment of illegal aliens.

Furthermore, immigration enforcement remains exclusively a federal responsibility, as affirmed by the Supreme Court ruling in Arizona v. United States (2012). Local policies that obstruct federal immigration efforts not only violate statutory law but also raise concerns regarding the legal liability of public officials.

Legal Violations of Sanctuary City Policies

The U.S. Code (Title 8, U.S.C. § 1324(a)) explicitly defines several immigration-related offences that sanctuary policies may violate:

1. Alien Smuggling – Prohibits knowingly bringing unauthorized aliens into the U.S. at any location other than a designated port of entry.
2. Domestic Transporting – Criminalizes transporting or moving illegal aliens within the U.S. in furtherance of their unlawful presence.
3. Harbouring – Makes it illegal to conceal, harbour, or shield unauthorized aliens from detection in any place, including buildings or vehicles.
4. Encouraging or Inducing Illegal Immigration – Prohibits encouraging or inducing an alien to enter or reside unlawfully in the U.S.
5. Conspiracy and Aiding or Abetting – Criminalizes conspiring to commit or assisting in the commission of any of the above offences.
6. Bringing Aliens to the United States – Makes it a federal offence to bring or attempt to bring unauthorized aliens into the country.
7. Detention and Removal of Aliens Ordered Removed – Under 8 U.S.C. § 1231, the federal government has the authority to detain and remove aliens who have been ordered deported.
8. Grounds for Deportation – 8 U.S.C. § 1227 outlines the categories of aliens subject to removal, including those who violate immigration laws, commit certain crimes, or pose security threats.
9. Restrictions on Foreign Aid for Noncompliance – 8 U.S.C. § 1253(d) allows the U.S. government to withhold foreign aid from countries that refuse to accept deported nationals.

Federal Supremacy on Immigration

Immigration enforcement is the sole jurisdiction of the federal government, as reinforced by multiple Supreme Court decisions. In Arizona v. United States (2012), the Court ruled that states and localities cannot create policies that obstruct or contradict federal immigration law. Sanctuary city policies, which prevent local law enforcement from cooperating with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), directly challenge this federal supremacy. The Supremacy Clause dictates that federal immigration law supersedes local policies, making sanctuary city ordinances legally indefensible.

Additionally, under 8 U.S.C. § 1373, state and local governments are prohibited from enacting policies that restrict communication between local officials and federal immigration authorities. Sanctuary policies that impede the flow of immigration status information violate federal law and undermine national security.

Presidential Authority in Immigration Enforcement

The President, as chief executive, has broad authority to enforce immigration laws and determine enforcement priorities through prosecutorial discretion. This includes:

• Deferred Action (DACA, DED) – The executive branch can defer removal proceedings for specific groups as an act of prosecutorial discretion, as recognized by federal courts.
• Parole in Place – Under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(d)(5), the President has the authority to allow certain noncitizens temporary entry for humanitarian or public benefit reasons.
• Deferred Enforced Departure (DED) – Historically used by Presidents to delay deportations for humanitarian or foreign policy reasons.

While the President has enforcement discretion, this does not grant states or localities the authority to obstruct federal immigration laws. The Supremacy Clause and Arizona v. United States (2012) confirm that immigration enforcement is not a matter of state discretion and that sanctuary policies are legally indefensible.

Potential Criminal Liability for Sanctuary City Officials

Under Title 8, U.S.C. § 1324(a), individuals found violating federal immigration laws face severe penalties, including:

• Fines and imprisonment of up to 10 years for alien smuggling and conspiracy.
• Up to 5 years in prison for domestic transportation, harbouring, or aiding and abetting unauthorized aliens.
• Enhanced penalties for financial gain or criminal aliens, including mandatory minimum sentences and, in cases resulting in death, life imprisonment or the death penalty.

These legal repercussions raise questions about whether public officials who implement sanctuary policies should be held accountable under federal law. By refusing to comply with federal mandates, sanctuary cities conceivably are exposing themselves to legal challenges and prosecution.