Thread: I have a Question

Okay, here's my question.

Many of you seem to get very excited whenever a city passes anti-illegal immigration legislation. On the surface, this IS exciting; however, from what I've observed, all these cities get sued and judges rule the legislation unconstitutional.

Can any of you site to me any new anti-illegal immigration legislation that has passed and has not been challenged in court? What citiy(ies) are currently enforcing new anti-illegal immigration legislation that they passed? I'm very curious about this because I'd like to compile a list of cities that have passed leglislation that have not been inundated with legal challenges.

Thanks for any info you can give me.

Originally Posted by americangirl

Okay, here's my question.

Many of you seem to get very excited whenever a city passes anti-illegal immigration legislation. On the surface, this IS exciting; however, from what I've observed, all these cities get sued and judges rule the legislation unconstitutional.

Can any of you site to me any new anti-illegal immigration legislation that has passed and has not been challenged in court? What citiy(ies) are currently enforcing new anti-illegal immigration legislation that they passed? I'm very curious about this because I'd like to compile a list of cities that have passed leglislation that have not been inundated with legal challenges.

Thanks for any info you can give me.

True and I am waiting for the ACLU or La Raza to sue the state for discrimination against Latinos!

I think it would be good to have an accurate detailing of what cities have declared themselves as "sanctuary cities", and what cities have passed anti-illegal immigration legislation (not just passed, but that is actually being enforced).

Here is a list as of 8/9/07 of sanctuary cities.

http://ojjpac.org/sanctuary.asp

Alabama
*
Note: False information appears to have been submitted to OJJPAC.org regarding the listing of Alabaster, AL. As a result Alabaster, AL is being removed from the sanctuary city list.

Alaska
* Anchorage (6/13/07 Congressional Research Service)
* Fairbanks (6/13/07 Congressional Research Service) [Mayor of Fairbanks disputes the listing. However, OJJPAC has verified the listing of Fairbanks, Alaska, as having a sanctuary policy by the Congressional Research Service in an 2005 report. OJJPAC has requested that the city administration forward its policy demonstrating that it is not a sanctuary city--but none has been forwarded as of 8-9-07.]

Arizona
*

Chandler, AZ (Added 5/30/07)
* Phoenix, AZ

California
* Bell Gardens, CA
* City of Industry, CA
* City of Commerce, CA
* Cypress, CA
* Davis CA
* Diamond Bar, CA (6/26/07 Disputed by city. Currently being researched to verify.)
* Downey, CA
* Fresno, CA (6/13/07 Congressional Research Service)
* Lakewood, CA
* Los Angeles, CA (Congressional Research Service)
* Long Beach, CA
* Lynwood, CA
* Maywood, CA
* Montebello, CA
* National City, CA
* Norwalk, CA
* Paramount, CA
* Pico Rivera, CA
* So. Gate, CA
* San Bernardino, Ca. (Added 6/7/07, reader submitted)
* San Diego, CA (Congressional Research Service)
* Santa Cruz, CA (Added 5/30/07, documented by KSBW news)
* San Francisco, CA (Congressional Research Service)
* San Jose, CA (6/13/07 Congressional Research Service)
* Sonoma County, CA (Congressional Research Service)
* Vernon, CA
* Watsonville, CA (Added 5/30/07, documented by KSBW news)
* Wilmington, CA

Colorado

* Aurora, CO
* Commerce City, CO
* Denver, CO (Congressional Research Service)
* Durango, CO (6/13/07 Congressional Research Service)
* Federal Heights, CO
* Fort Collins CO
* Lafayette, CO (Added 6/3/07, documented by reader)
* Thornton, CO
* Westminster, CO

Connecticut
*

New Haven, CT (Added 6/4/07. TV News 8: City council votes 25-1 to issue ID cards to illegals)
* Springfield CT (Disputed)

Florida

*

DeLeon Springs, FL
*

Deltona, Fl
* Miami, FL
* Sanford, Fl (7-23-07. Listing disputed by City, under review.)

Georgia
* Dalton, GA (Added 5/30/07. 6/18/07 Listing disputed as inaccurate by the City of Dalton, GA )

Illinois
* Chicago, IL (Congressional Research Service)
* Cicero, IL (6/13/07 Congressional Research Service)
* Evanston, IL (6/13/07 Congressional Research Service)

Massachusetts
* Cambridge, Mass. (Source: Boston Globe. First passed resolution in 1985)
* Orleans, Mass. (6/13/07 Congressional Research Service)

Maine
* Portland (Added 5/31/07 Note: Maine resident reported that Portland city council passed sanctuary legislation)
* State of Maine (Added 5/31/07 Note: Maine resident reported that the governor signed a sanctuary executive order)

Maryland
* Baltimore, MD (Congressional Research Service)
* Gaithersburg, MD
* Takoma Park, MD (Reported that City ordinance passed some 20 years ago; Congressional Research Service)

Michigan
*

Ann Arbor, MI (6/13/07 Congressional Research Service)
*

Detroit, MI (6/13/07 Congressional Research Service)

Minnesota
* Minneapolis, MN (Congressional Research Service)
* St. Paul, MN
* Worthington, MN (Added 5-30-07 Note: This is where a Swift plant was raided by ICE in December, 2006)

Nevada
* Reno (Added 5-31-07)

New Jersey
*

Bridgeton, NJ (Added 6-3-07) [7-27-07 Disputed by a reputed farm worker advocate, see note below.]
* Camden, NJ
* Fort Lee, NJ
* Hightstown, NJ (Added 5-30-07)
* Jersey City, NJ
* Newark, NJ (Added 6-3-07)
* North Bergen, NJ
* Trenton, NJ
* Union City, NJ
* West New York, NJ

New Mexico
*

Albuquerque, NM (6/13/07 Congressional Research Service)
*

Rio Ariba County, NM (6/13/07 Congressional Research Service)
*

Santa Fe, NM (6/13/07 Congressional Research Service)

New York
* Bay Shore, NY
* Brentwood, NY
* Central Islip, NY
* Farmingville, NY
* New York City, NY
* Peekskill, NY [Disputed, being researched]
* Riverhead, NY
* Shirly/Mastic, NY
* Spring Valley Village, NY (Added 7-25-07)
* Uniondale, NY
* Westbury, NY

North Carolina
* Charlotte, NC
* Durham, NC (6/13/07 Congressional Research Service)
* Raleigh
* Winston-Salem

Ohio
*

Columbus, OH (7/5/07 Source: 5/10/07 Columbus Dispatch article stating illegal aliens in misdemeanor cases are not reported to ICE)
*

Painesville, OH (7-19-07 Source: 7-18-07 Cleveland Scene article)

Oklahoma
*

Oklahoma City (de facto)
* Tulsa (6-3-07 Note: Tulsa city council is discussing changing its sanctuary policy.)

Oregon
*

State of Oregon * (8-9-07 Congressional Research Service) *(See note below)
* Ashland, OR (8-9-07 Congressional Research Service)
* Gaston, OR (8-9-07 Congressional Research Service)
* Marion County, OR (8-9-07 Congressional Research Service)
* Portland, OR



Texas
* Austin, TX (Congressional Research Service)
* Baytown, TX (6-13-07 Local reader observation)
* Brownsville, TX
* Channelview, TX (6-13-07 Local reader observation)
* Denton, TX
* Dallas, TX
* El Cenizo, TX (6-13-07 Congressional Research Service)
* Ft.Worth, TX
* Houston, TX (Congressional Research Service)
* Katy, TX (Congressional Research Service)
* Laredo, TX
* Mcallen, TX
* Port Arthur, TX (6-13-07 Reader/resident observation)
* San Antonio, TX [Note: The Sanctuary status of San Antonio is disputed, being researched.]

Utah
*

Provo, UT
* Salt Lake City, UT

Virginia
*

Fairfax County, VA
*

Virginia Beach, VA (Added 6/3/07)

Washington

* Seattle, WA (Added 5/30/07; Congressional Research Service)

Wisconsin

* Madison, WI (Congressional Research Service)

Wyoming

*

Jackson Hole, WY



Additional Notes:

State of Oregon

According to a CRS report (October, 2005), Oregon passed a law in 1987 that prohibits local and state law enforcement from using state resources for locating and capturing illegal aliens. Law enforcement was permitted [but not required] to "exchange information" with federal immigration agents if an illegal alien was arrested for a crime.

Bridgeton, NJ 7-27-07 Disputed by a reputed farm worker advocate who sent me this email:

"I just wanted to point out an inaccuracy on your website's listing of sanctuary cities. You have Bridgeton, NJ listed as a sanctuary city, and indeed it is most definitely not. I work with CATA - The Farmworkers' Support committee (www.cata-farmworkers.org) and we have an organized group of membership in this town. One of our goals is working towards making Bridgeton an sanctuary city, but the local government is quite unfriendly towards the immigrant population, and the mayor has even hinted at wanting to implement a Hazleton type of ordinance (luckily, given yesterday's legal decision, that won't be happening)."

Columbus, OH

The Columbus Dispatch [Ohio] wrote:

"The police didn't contact immigration authorities concerning those who were determined to be undocumented, Booth said. Authorities say that's typical when it comes to misdemeanor charges." [Columbus, Ohio]

Painesville, OH

Cleveland Scene (7-18-07) quotes the Painesville Police Chief Gary Smith:

***He [Police Chief Gary Smith] has no qualms about laying out his indifference in plain English: "We don't care what your [immigration] status is." ***

Oklahoma City, OK

One reader wrote about Oklahoma City:
Oklahoma City is a sanctuary city de facto. Police officers have been told not to stop any Hispanic for minor traffic violations, because they have a good chance of being illegal and it is a waste of time. The City has not been enforcing City Code if the recipient of the code violation doesn't speak English. And is not attempting to enforce the single-family dwelling laws.

Please look in our FOCUS CAMPAIGN Section.

It is overdue for updating, but lots of cities have passed the 287(g) certification program and English as the official language. None of these cities have been sued yet and we doubt they will.

Other cities and counties are in process or have moved to cut off taxpayer benefits to illegal aliens too.

While there are lawsuits in the high profile cases of Hazleton and Farmers Branch, this is not the norm and most cities are proceeding without lawsuits. While court ruling precedents may affect other cities, they are proceeding with trying to find ways to stop illegal immigration.

We have some ordinances proceeding without resistance, others facing court resistance.

It is a mixed bag.

We need more cities doing this and we need them adapting and revising their ordinances to create so many different techniques that the ACLU can't sue them all.

W

Originally Posted by ALIPAC

Please look in our FOCUS CAMPAIGN Section.

It is overdue for updating, but lots of cities have passed the 287(g) certification program and English as the official language. None of these cities have been sued yet and we doubt they will.

Other cities and counties are in process or have moved to cut off taxpayer benefits to illegal aliens too.

While there are lawsuits in the high profile cases of Hazleton and Farmers Branch, this is not the norm and most cities are proceeding without lawsuits. While court ruling precedents may affect other cities, they are proceeding with trying to find ways to stop illegal immigration.

We have some ordinances proceeding without resistance, others facing court resistance.

It is a mixed bag.

We need more cities doing this and we need them adapting and revising their ordinances to create so many different techniques that the ACLU can't sue them all.

W

Well from my local Country Legislator Steve Levy he said Suffolk county does not give social services to illegal immigrants. I plan a follow up email that will give more "evidents" and some other questions that jog my mind.

The state of Georgia enacted a tough anti-illegal immigration bill which started July 1. There were rumors of a legal battle, but they backed down.

Gwinnett County in Georgia just recently passed a bill that government contract workers had to prove citizenship. The illegal alien lobby is all up in arms about it as I write. They are threatening to sue, so I don't know the outcome.

The Cobb County Commission in Georgia is working on passing laws against renting to illegals. Not sure how that will go.

Cherokee County in Georgia wrote up legislation and everything. They backed down in the final hour because of threats of lawsuits.

So how many of these so called threats around the country really result in lawsuits?

Originally Posted by ALIPAC

Please look in our FOCUS CAMPAIGN Section.

It is overdue for updating, but lots of cities have passed the 287(g) certification program and English as the official language. None of these cities have been sued yet and we doubt they will.

Other cities and counties are in process or have moved to cut off taxpayer benefits to illegal aliens too.

While there are lawsuits in the high profile cases of Hazleton and Farmers Branch, this is not the norm and most cities are proceeding without lawsuits. While court ruling precedents may affect other cities, they are proceeding with trying to find ways to stop illegal immigration.

We have some ordinances proceeding without resistance, others facing court resistance.

It is a mixed bag.

We need more cities doing this and we need them adapting and revising their ordinances to create so many different techniques that the ACLU can't sue them all.

W

Thank you, William. I'll check it out.