This House would let cities set their own immigration policy.

civic

Sanctuary cities already partially do this in practice. Federalists argue policy coherence demands a single national stance; localists argue cities bear the costs and benefits and should decide.

Background

Roughly 600 US jurisdictions have "sanctuary" policies limiting cooperation with ICE detainer requests, per the Center for Immigration Studies. The Supreme Court has held that immigration enforcement is a federal function (Arizona v. United States, 2012) but cities are not required to use their police as federal agents. Toronto, Berlin, and Barcelona have gone further with municipal ID cards that grant city services regardless of federal status. The federalism question moves from "are sanctuary cities allowed" to "can a city actively grant a status the federal government does not recognize."

Government opens with

Cities know their labor markets, schools, and capacity; one-size policy fails both ends.

Opposition responds with

Federalizing immigration was a solved problem; un-federalizing it is a rule-of-law problem.