Los Angeles City Council Passes Sanctuary City Ordinance
The Los Angeles City Council Tuesday adopted a sanctuary city ordinance that prohibits the use of city resources in immigration enforcement, including cooperating with federal immigration agents as the incoming Trump administration hints at immigration crackdown.
Background
The city council passed the motion unanimously to codify the protective measures after City Attorney Hydee Feldstein Soto and Mayor Karen Bass expedited the draft ordinance last week.
History of the Ordinance
While former Mayor Eric Garcetti issued an executive directive in 2019 to protect immigrants, and the LAPD officers are already prohibited from asking people’s immigration status when making arrests, Tuesday’s ordinance, which was initially proposed in 18 months ago, will officially put the sanctuary policy in the city’s books.
Impact on the Community
“We know often members of our immigration community – even without this (Trump) administration – have lived in fear and have consequently among the highest rates of underreporting of crime, assaults or violence,” Councilmember Monica Rodriguez said. “We don’t have a safer city if people are living in fear and hiding in the shadows and unable to come forward and cooperate with law enforcement in manners that we need them to particularly because we want to keep them safe.”
Ordinance Provisions
The newly approved ordinance would also prohibit “any city resources, property or personnel from being utilized for any federal immigration enforcement,” as well as city cooperation with federal immigration authorities in “execution of their duties” as it pertains to immigration enforcement.
Reaction to the Ordinance
Newly appointed Los Angeles Police Department Chief Jim McDonnell has said the department would not engage in immigration enforcement. He has remained steadfast in that position.
Last week, Tom Homan, who has been tapped to be Trump’s new “border czar,” said during an appearance on “Fox & Friends” that “Nothing will stop us from deporting migrant criminals.”
Homan addressed sanctuary jurisdictions, using New York City as an example and noting that, “If we can’t get assistance from New York City, we may have to double the number of agents we send to New York City. Because we’re going to the job with you or without you.”
He also suggested that the president withhold federal funding to sanctuary jurisdictions.
Criticisms of the Ordinance
Roxanne Hoge, communications director for the L.A. County Republican Party, last week criticized the concept of sanctuary cities and states.
“A country without secure borders isn’t a country at all,” Hoge said in a statement. “The protections they offer aren’t for abuelas (grandmothers) getting ice cream, they’re for people who’ve entered the country illegally and committed additional crimes. Whether drunk driving, robbery, sexual violence, assault or murder, none of those should go unpunished,” she added. “Perpetrators should definitely not be protected by the largesse taken from hard-working taxpayers.”
Conclusion
The Los Angeles City Council’s decision to pass a sanctuary city ordinance sends a strong message about the city’s commitment to protecting its immigrant residents. Despite the potential backlash from the Trump administration, the council has chosen to prioritize the safety and well-being of its community.
FAQs
Q: What does the ordinance prohibit?
A: The ordinance prohibits the use of city resources, property, or personnel in federal immigration enforcement and cooperation with federal immigration authorities in immigration enforcement.
Q: What is the purpose of the ordinance?
A: The purpose of the ordinance is to protect the rights of immigrant residents in Los Angeles and ensure that they are not targeted by federal immigration authorities.
Q: How does this affect the LAPD?
A: The ordinance does not change the LAPD’s current policy of not asking people’s immigration status when making arrests.
Q: What is the reaction from the Trump administration?
A: Tom Homan, Trump’s new “border czar,” has hinted at an immigration crackdown and suggested withholding federal funding from sanctuary jurisdictions.
