The notion of “sanctuary cities” may face heightened scrutiny from a provision in SB 1070 (PDF), Arizona’s new law targeting illegal immigration.
The provision prohibits counties, cities, and towns from adopting “sanctuary” policies that limit the enforcement of federal immigration law to less than the full extent permitted by federal law.
An op-ed by former Immigration and Naturalization Service general counsel William P. Cook, published July 30 in The Wall Street Journal, said U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton’s decision to uphold that provision — while reversing several others — set a precedent for other states to crack down on what he calls “renegade localities” that refuse to take part in immigration enforcement.
Chatham County Commissioner George Lucier hopes North Carolina doesn’t follow Arizona’s lead.
“I think it’s wrong for the federal government to ask local governments to deal with what it hasn’t been able to deal with,” Lucier said.
Chatham County has been labeled a “sanctuary county” for adopting a resolution (PDF) last year “in strong opposition to any local governmental agency contracting with the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement for the purpose of enforcing federal immigration laws.”
Lucier begrudges the sanctuary label, saying most counties choose not to enforce federal immigration laws. Unlike most other jurisdictions, which quietly have not partnered with ICE, he said, Chatham County has put the policy in writing.
Only nine North Carolina counties participate in Section 287(g) of the federal immigration law. It’s a voluntary program letting local law enforcement agencies partner with ICE agents to identify, process, and deport illegal immigrants. ICE trains and supervises local police in federal enforcement actions.
In contrast, 39 counties have asked to join a more modest enforcement program — Secure Communities — a fingerprint-sharing system that notifies ICE automatically when illegal aliens end up in county jails. Among those counties entering the arrangement with the feds are Durham, Forsyth, Mecklenburg, and Orange. All are home to municipalities that have been identified as sanctuary cities: Durham, Winston-Salem, Charlotte, Chapel Hill, and Carrboro.
Why would counties with sanctuary cities join Secure Communities and help Washington enforce federal law? David Plyler, chairman of the county board of commissioners, was unaware that Winston-Salem was considered a sanctuary city. But he said Sheriff William Schatzman requested the Secure Communities funding. Plyler said the county has adequate jail space, the costs entailed with the program were marginal, and that the board largely agrees with its goals.
Phone messages and e-mails left with commissioners in Orange County — home of Chapel Hill and Carrboro — were not returned.
Financial stress on locals
Chatham County’s Lucier calls Arizona’s law an unfunded mandate. He said cost is what keeps most counties and cities from participating in deportation efforts.
“Local governments now are under tremendous stress,” he said. “We’re sort of the bottom of the barrel when it comes to funding — where the rubber meets the road in terms of funding schools, health services and social services.”
Lucier said Chatham County — which is 15-percent Hispanic — has not experienced the negative effects sometimes associated with illegal immigration.
“People worry about unemployment, crime and tax increases,” he said. “We have not experienced any of those.”
Unemployment in Chatham County is at 6.9 percent, the third lowest in the state, and schools are not overcrowded.
Small jails and limited law enforcement personnel are the primary reasons the county chose not to participate in ICE’s program.
“Our jail is over capacity 62 percent of the time,” Lucier said. “Any up-tick in jail activity would require us to build a jail sooner than we would be economically able to do, unless we delayed construction of one of our schools.”
Ron Woodard of NC Listen, a group advocating tougher enforcement of immigration laws, said the unfunded mandate argument is a bit of a red herring. “Local law enforcement has gotten involved in [enforcing] all kinds of big issues, like drugs,” Woodard said. “I don’t think anyone would say they don’t want their local police involved in [preventing] drug trafficking.”
Woodard added building schools sounds nicer than building jails, but “the largest cost of immigration is [public] education,” so adding jail beds might actually be cheaper.
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano wants all U.S. counties eventually to join Secure Communities, and Woodard wonders why more counties in North Carolina haven’t signed on.
“It’s one thing to say I don’t want to train my law enforcement personnel to detain someone for speeding,” Woodard said. “It’s another thing to say I don’t have time, once you’re already in my jail, to run your name through a database.”
While Lucier and Woodard agree securing the border is the ultimate solution, Woodard said a third of illegal immigrants could not have been caught at the border. They are here on expired visas and ICE needs cities and counties to help “ferret them out.”
Lucier said it’s not that simple.
“What do you do with a person who has been here 15 years, has paid taxes, and is a contributing member of the community?” he asked. “What happens to the children who were born here? Those are the issues the federal government needs to come to grips with.”
Sara Burrows is an associate editor of Carolina Journal.