Constructing Pro-Immigrant Spaces: An Analysis of the Policies and Practices of Sanctuary

Abstract

In the United States, sanctuary cities are generally defined as sub-federal jurisdictions that refrain from engaging in the enforcement of federal immigration law. Proponents defend sanctuary cities based on the claim that local participation in immigration enforcement compromises trust and cooperation between residents and local law enforcement agencies which is detrimental to public safety. Not surprisingly, many existing studies have treated “sanctuary city” as a binary independent variable tied to sub-federal involvement in immigration enforcement. These studies have no doubt been instrumental to advancing our knowledge of local responses to expanding and intensifying federal immigration enforcement. However, sociological insight into sanctuary cities is likely to benefit from broadening current perspectives and assessing the potential implications sanctuary city policies have for shaping local contexts of reception and facilitating immigrant integration. The emerging interest in the study of sanctuary cities among sociologists has seen very little intersection with relevant bodies of literature on contexts of reception, immigrant assimilation, and citizenship. This dissertation is an in-depth exploration of sanctuary city policies at the municipal level with attention to the intended outcomes associated with sanctuary cities as they pertain to not only public safety and crime, but also immigrant inclusion and participation in civic spaces. Specifically, this study is informed by comprehensive content analyses of legislative text, police documents, and news media from 1979 to 2019, covering 210 sanctuary cities across 41 states. A case study of Seattle is also conducted to provide a closer look at the meanings policy makers, civil servants, and service providers attach to the concept of “sanctuary.” Using 23 semi-structured in-depth interviews, the case study examines the processes by which employees of the City of Seattle and immigrant-serving non-profit organizations widen the boundaries of inclusion and participation for immigrants while simultaneously resisting and operating within the legal framework of hostile federal immigration laws. This dissertation builds upon current understandings of sanctuary cities and introduces new angles for theorizing and conceptualizing sanctuary cities as more than just a place-based designation. The content analyses highlight the different strategies cities adopt to dilute the reach of federal immigration enforcement and policing on vulnerable immigrant populations. While proponents and opponents of sanctuary cities tend to converge around narratives of public safety and crime, the findings from my dissertation suggest that there are additional considerations that inform the development and implementation of sanctuary city policies. Furthermore, policymakers and advocates in cities center decisions in response to federal immigration enforcement priorities around objectives that potentially shape immigrant experiences such as integration, civic engagement, and the practice of citizenship. Supplementary analyses conducted in Seattle provide support for recognizing sanctuary city policies as pro-immigrant policies that are intended to encourage immigrant participation and inclusion in civic spaces, in addition to building trust and cooperation between city officials and residents to promote public safety. Specifically, the Welcoming City resolution in Seattle is analyzed as a framework for developing pro-immigrant policies and practices that facilitate civic engagement, affirm membership, and enable immigrants to practice local citizenship in their daily lives.