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.
@ISIDEWITH8yrs8Y
No
@9FCLFVT8mos8MO
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.
@9CPKLDT11mos11MO
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.
@ISIDEWITH8yrs8Y
Yes
@9G4B6F58mos8MO
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.
@9FZ7G4K8mos8MO
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.
@9FSMRGW8mos8MO
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.
@9FN73VL8mos8MO
America first. States cannot afford to harbor these individuals. They need to get turned away and deported.
@ISIDEWITH8yrs8Y
No, and we should ban the use of sanctuary cities
@9F627RX9mos9MO
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.
@96NTJ3J2yrs2Y
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
@9L4Z23BIndependent 2wks2W
No, any state with sanctuary cities should not be eligible to receive grants and loans through federal programs
@9GZDTYYIndependent7mos7MO
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.
@9GN25PD7mos7MO
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.
@8SVQL2G3yrs3Y
No, but leave it up to the state and local levels on whether or not they want to fund it.
@8CZ85VG4yrs4Y
@8CXGQW2Libertarian4yrs4Y
Yes, and we should ban the use of sanctuary cities
@9L74FFC2mos2MO
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
@9GN5KWP7mos7MO
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
@9D9TN4F10mos10MO
No, We don't need Sanctuary Cities, we need to make legalization a little more accessible. Then sanctuary cities wouldn’t be necessary
@9BLK65R1yr1Y
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
@9776R482yrs2Y
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
@8MK2X9L4yrs4Y
Yes, but funding should go towards helping them become citizens
@97D85F6Independent2yrs2Y
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
@9N295MR 1 day1D
No and not because of the undocumented individuals but for the sake of eliminating the purpose for prosecution.
@9MZ5HVT2 days2D
Yes as long as much funding goes toward recourses to aid the individuals to properly become citizens
@9MYCPF72 days2D
There should be no sanctuary cities because there should be no illegal immigrants as there should be a pathway for undocumented persons to become documented
@9MTZNC44 days4D
No, government funding should be directed towards fixing our broken immigration system and streamlining the path to citizenship instead of subsidizing sanctuary cities that help perpetuate the problem
@9MNSKR76 days6D
Immigration is a Federal issue, and states and cities should not be making their own laws or taking actions outside the approval and/or coordination with the Federal gov't.
@9MKQ3GM1wk1W
YES, because non-sanctuary cities that treat the cruelly do too. If one were dropped, drop the other. Again: overly simplistic question.
@9MK8GN8Constitution2wks2W
No, the job for managing sanctuary cities are under the jurisdiction of the state government, not the Federal government.
@9MJH2MDIndependent2wks2W
No. Sanctuary cities deny federal law by housing illegal immigrants and should not receive funding to continue doing so.
@9MH78R32wks2W
Yes, but only if they are willing to work with immigration services on human traffickers and drug runners.
@9MG93D72wks2W
No, the city is not a government designed city so therefore it should be run by those who created it, almost like a non-profit business, only it's a city
@9MFBRSL2wks2W
No, we should focus funding on fixing the current immigration crisis instead of subsidizing cities that perpetuate it
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...
