A sanctuary city is a city that adopts local policies designed to not prosecute people solely for being an undocumented individual in the country in which they are currently living. In January 2017, President Trump issued an executive order that would withhold federal funding from sanctuary cities. In April 2017 a federal judge ruled that Trump’s order was unconstitutional.
@ISIDEWITH7yrs7Y
No
@9FCLFVT7mos7MO
Sanctuary cities such as New York, Chicago and Los Angeles have all admitted that they cannot afford to support the number of migrants currently seeking sanctuary. The number arriving to their cities has been overwhelming financially, and crime has increased. They are also running out of shelters. People are living in the streets.
This is why border control is necessary.
Across the world, border control has been a proven necessity for civilizations through out history.
@9CPKLDT9mos9MO
Although I understand why certain cities would like to undergo humanitarian efforts, it is undeniable that border security, and all of the problems surrounding it, have become a massive issue for the US that many of the states have been divided over. It is unreasonable that sanctuary cities should receive federal funding, as the government should not use taxpayer money that comes from people who reside in states where they will be inherently against it. This violates the founding principles of America as a union of states where the input of all people is to be respected. Only those who states democratically voted to have sanctuary cities should fund sanctuary cities, and others who aren't in support of them should not be expected to pay for the lack of border security.
@ISIDEWITH7yrs7Y
Yes
@9G4B6F56mos6MO
There are plenty of domestic issues in this country. Why spend money supporting people who come here illegally instead of all the problems at home.
@9FZ7G4K6mos6MO
It costs too much in taxpayer money. Our citizens struggle every day to make a living. They shouldn’t have their money taken away for illegal immigrants.
@9FSMRGW7mos7MO
Why should illegal immigrants be funded by legal citizen's tax dollars, I think sanctuary cities should be abolished, and all illegal immigrants should be deported.
@9FN73VL7mos7MO
America first. States cannot afford to harbor these individuals. They need to get turned away and deported.
@ISIDEWITH7yrs7Y
No, and we should ban the use of sanctuary cities
@9F627RX7mos7MO
That is absolutely nonsensical, if cities want to become a safe haven for immigrants it is absolutely in their right to do so, especially since the process to become a citizen is too lengthy.
@96NTJ3J1yr1Y
Yes, but fine companies that employ illegal immigrants
@936MGVY2yrs2Y
Yes but decrease the amount of sanctuary cities.
Deleted2yrs2Y
No, federal funding is unconstitutional
@92QY7WF2yrs2Y
No, all federal funding is unconstitutional
Deleted2yrs2Y
Yes, but decrease the amount of sanctuary cities.
@8ZDDG472yrs2Y
@9L74FFC3wks3W
No, we should address the root problem of illegal immigration and focus on reforming the broken system. Then sanctuary cities wouldn’t exist in the first place
@9GZDTYYIndependent5mos5MO
Sanctuary cities should be subject to the same conditions on federal funding as all other cities, so that the federal government can deny funding to a sanctuary city but not because of the policies designed to not prosecute people solely for being undocumented.
@9GN25PD6mos6MO
This is a weird question. I don't think the federal government should be redistributing wealth. Illegal immigration sanctuary cities are a mistake; however, nullifying federal laws should be more common.
@8CZ85VG4yrs4Y
@8CXGQW2Libertarian4yrs4Y
Yes, and we should ban the use of sanctuary cities
@9GN5KWP6mos6MO
No, we should spend money on reforming our broken immigration system to ease the path to citizenship instead. Then illegal immigration won’t be an issue and sanctuary cities will be irrelevant
@8QPQM74Independent3yrs3Y
No, sanctuary cities violate the supremacy clause
@9BF64VQ1yr1Y
No, but leave it at the state and local levels.
@8D826DK4yrs4Y
@9D9TN4F8mos8MO
No, We don't need Sanctuary Cities, we need to make legalization a little more accessible. Then sanctuary cities wouldn’t be necessary
@9BLK65R12mos12MO
This should be up to the state.
@8ZGDY7V2yrs2Y
Yes, but ban the use of sanctuary cities
@93GNH792yrs2Y
Yes but decrease the amount of sanctuary cities
Only if they fight against illegal immigration
@9776R481yr1Y
Yes, those are still cities that are a part of the US and irregardless of the type of occupants, the city should still be protected
@8MK2X9L3yrs3Y
Yes, but funding should go towards helping them become citizens
@97D85F6Independent1yr1Y
Yes, but only if that funding is used to create/sustain programs to help with becoming an American citizen.
@98PJRK41yr1Y
No, federal funding is unconstitutional
@9LKQ2C32 days2D
Sanctuary cities should work on their internal homeless population first before they spend tax payer dollars on others
@9LKM3QB2 days2D
They should not be denied federal funding if they provide sanctuary for immigrants, but they should fund that sanctuary themselves
@9LH2394Republican7 days7D
No they should not receive federal funding and all illegal immigrants should be sent to those sanctuary cities, and then we'll see how those cities like open borders.
@9LFW5MS 1wk1W
No sanctuary cities for illegals. They should not ever be allowed here. Sanctuary cities for legal immigrants should be billed to the taxpayers who voted those governments in to allow it.
@9LFRNMQ1wk1W
Yes and No, we should federally fund sanctuary cities, but it MUST be the city's priority to investigate the undocumented individual's background and purpose of coming to the United States.
@9LCQP89 2wks2W
No, but sanctuaries states should. The state should always be the intermediary between the federal and local governments.
@9L9C8C42wks2W
Yes, and the sanctuary cities should use the funding to offer housing and job opportunities for those immigrants along with schooling.
@9L8SHVS2wks2W
A private company should be allowed to help them, but I wouldn't want to pay taxes on a city that holds immigrants.
@9KYXJPGIndependent 4wks4W
"Although Lopez-Sanchez had several outstanding warrants in 2015 authorities were unable to deport him due to San Francisco’s sanctuary city policy which prevents law enforcement officials from questioning a resident’s immigration status." - Immigrants can reside in place where it be very difficult to arrest if they commit a serious crime.
Yes and they should be advertised more because the government could use these cities to help with overpopulation.
@9KPXK8Q1mo1MO
Yes, and they should receive extra federal funding as compensation for being willing to accept more immigrants
@9KMTT6B1mo1MO
No, and sanctuary cities should be geographically restricted to the former Mexican Cession and Gadsden Purchase areas of the country.
@9KL38PJ1mo1MO
Yes, but only for actions related to the betterment of the entire city, including citizens (public transportation, schools, hospitals).
The historical activity of users engaging with this question.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
