U.S. Sanctuary Laws Under Attack

Groups pushing to curb immigration have mounted a highly organized national campaign against local "sanctuary" laws that typically direct police officers to refrain from checking on subjects' immigration status.

Aside from a flurry of letter writing campaigns, immigration watchdog groups are also helping take sanctuary cities to court. They argue that the sanctuary laws encourage illegal immigration, undermine the rule of law and allow undocumented immigrants to commit crimes again and again.

In May, the groups helped end the sanctuary policy in New York City, the nation's traditional gateway for immigrants. Sanctuary opponents also gained allies in Congress, among legislators who believe the ordinances weaken domestic security against terrorism.

Many cities adopted sanctuary policies in the 1980s to foster trust between police and immigrants, who may be reluctant to cooperate for fear of being deported. Los Angeles and Houston have sanctuary policies, and San Francisco's sanctuary laws date back to 1985. The statutes infuriate critics, who see them as an underhanded way to block federal immigration law.

"Any nation has to have a single immigration policy," says Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.). "You simply cannot have cities and counties and police departments running their own." Tancredo failed in July in an attempt to cut off Justice Department funding for sanctuary cities.

The Washington, D.C.-based Friends of Immigration Law Enforcement, or FILE, has an effective legal strategy of informing cities that they are vulnerable to legal action because of sanctuary laws. The group works with like-minded organizations such as Project USA and American Border Patrol organizing petitions and write-in campaigns.

FILE claims credit for the scrapping of New York City's sanctuary ordinance. The law came under scrutiny when, on December 2002, a woman was brutally assaulted and raped in a city park by a group of men, several of whom were undocumented and had prior arrests in New York but were not deported.

A month later, FILE members dashed off a legal notice to city officials, and in February they testified in a congressional hearing on whether the sanctuary law had contributed to the crime. Now, the rape victim is bringing a $50 million suit against the city, and FILE is in contact with the lawyers.

In May, under increasing congressional and legal pressure, Mayor Mike Bloomberg revoked the city's 1989 sanctuary ordinance and replaced it with a weaker policy that in the eyes of many immigrants offers no protection at all. Bloomberg promised to revise it yet again after his decision triggered a hail of criticism from immigrant communities. He has yet to do so.

"We've challenged two cities so far (Houston and New York) by alerting them that they are not in compliance with federal law and that we'll seek redress for any American or legal immigrant who suffers personal injury (as a result)," says Craig Nelsen, FILE executive director.

Houston was notified by FILE this year, and the group is cooperating with a Houston police officer that filed a legal challenge against the city's sanctuary policy.

San Francisco is listed on FILE's Web site as its next target.

"We recognize that the pressure is on, both from groups like FILE and the federal government," says Heba Nimr, who monitors federal immigration agencies at San Francisco's La Raza Centro Legal. Nimr cites the USA Patriot Act and post-Sept. 11 federal roundups and registration of Muslim immigrants as part of these pressures.

Police cannot effectively protect diverse communities if witnesses or victims of crime fear reporting information to officers because they are undocumented, says Angelica Salas, executive director of Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights Los Angeles.