By Brandy W. Walt-Rose
Since President Donald Trump returned to office in January 2025, sanctuary cities across the United States have come under renewed attack. These jurisdictions – cities and states that limit cooperation with federal immigration enforcement – have long served as safe havens for undocumented residents seeking protection from detention, deportation, and discrimination.
Within days of his inauguration, Trump issued a series of executive orders targeting these safe zones. Chief among them was Executive Order 14159, Protecting the American People Against Invasion, which expanded federal immigration powers and threatened to withhold funding from jurisdictions deemed “noncompliant.”
The order called for:
- Increased staffing of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP),
- Expedited removal procedures,
- Restrictions on undocumented immigrants’ access to public benefits,
- And a registration mandate for non-citizens.
These policies mark a broader shift toward aggressive federal enforcement and have reignited fear among immigrant communities and legal advocates alike.
Legal Resistance and Local Autonomy
Despite federal pressure, sanctuary cities are fighting back—both in the courtroom and on the ground. In April 2025, U.S. District Judge William Orrick ruled that the administration could not override previous court decisions blocking the denial of federal funds. His ruling specifically blocked enforcement of both Executive Order 14159 and its companion, EO 14218, reaffirming the constitutional principle that the federal government cannot coerce local jurisdictions into enforcing national immigration policy through funding threats.
Officials in San Francisco, Chicago, and New York continue to defend their sanctuary policies, arguing they foster trust between immigrant communities and law enforcement, reduce crime, and reflect a commitment to human dignity.
Political Retaliation and Public Tension
Republican leaders have launched high-profile investigations into sanctuary jurisdictions, summoning Democratic governors such as Kathy Hochul (NY), Tim Walz (MN), and JB Pritzker (IL) before congressional committees. Critics argue these hearings are political theater rather than pathways to meaningful reform.
In one dramatic incident on May 9, Newark Mayor Ras Baraka was arrested during a surprise inspection of the newly reopened Delaney Hall detention center in New Jersey. The facility – reopened under a $1 billion, 15-year contract with GEO Group – has become emblematic of the administration’s push to expand privatized immigrant detention. Concerns about transparency, oversight, and human rights abuses have grown, especially after four detainees escaped the facility in mid-June.
The fallout from the Delaney Hall incident continues: U.S. Rep. LaMonica McIver, who accompanied Baraka on the inspection, was indicted on three federal charges for allegedly interfering with officers. ICE has since begun relocating hundreds of detainees, citing public safety threats, while activists argue that the real danger stems from secretive federal contracts and lack of accountability.
Community Impact and Grassroots Response
As federal enforcement intensifies, fear continues to ripple through immigrant neighborhoods. In Washington, D.C., rumors of ICE operations near bilingual schools have caused widespread panic. In response, community groups are organizing know-your-rights trainings, preparing legal custody documents, and developing emergency action plans for families at risk.
Meanwhile, Congress has introduced a slew of punitive bills targeting sanctuary jurisdictions, including proposals to deny federal grants, revoke tax-exempt status for supporting organizations, and restrict public services. Civil rights groups warn these efforts threaten not just immigrants – but the entire concept of local self-governance.
Despite these challenges, sanctuary cities remain committed to resistance. Local officials, legal defenders, and grassroots organizers are working in tandem to protect residents, asserting that immigration justice is a moral imperative – not a partisan issue.
A Broader Ethical Lens
At The Humane Herald, we recognize that this moment is not isolated – it is part of a much larger ethical struggle. Sanctuary cities are more than legal constructs; they are manifestations of humane governance. They protect the vulnerable, uphold the principle of non-cooperation with harm, and model the kind of ethical leadership desperately needed in an era of rising authoritarianism.
Whether the issue is immigrant rights, animal liberation, or climate justice, the fundamental question remains: Will we build systems of care and solidarity – or systems of control and cruelty?
We want to hear from you.
How is your community responding to the federal crackdown on immigrants?
Submit your reflections, reports, or opinion essays to: humaneherald.editor@gmail.com
The Humane Herald 