A resolution on immigration enforcement passed by borough council earlier this month did not establish State College as a so-called ‘sanctuary city,’ borough leadership said on Friday.
The resolution stated that immigration enforcement is a federal responsibility and that ‘the State College Council will not voluntarily assist in any efforts by the federal government to apprehend, detain or deport community members.’ It also stated opposition to mandatory registration of individuals based on religion or ethnicity and affirmed the longstanding policy of State College Police not to ask victims or witnesses of crimes about immigration status.
It did not, however, change any police policies about working with other law enforcement agencies, including federal authorities.
‘The State College Police Department, as in the past, will continue to assist in criminal investigations with local, state and federal law enforcement authorities,’ a release from the borough stated. ‘The department will also assist any law enforcement agency in response to an order issued by the courts.’
“Nothing has changed,’ Police Chief John Gardner said. ‘If information about suspected criminal violations occurring in the State College Police Department’s jurisdictions comes to the attention of the State College Police today or anytime in the future, the police department will conduct the investigation themselves or assist any other local, state, or federal law enforcement agency in the investigation regardless of the person’s status.”
The statement comes on the heels of an executive order issued by President Donald Trump this week promising to strengthen immigration enforcement and ‘ensure that jurisdictions that fail to comply with applicable Federal law do not receive Federal funds, except as mandated by law.’
There is no formal or legal definition of what constitutes a sanctuary city, but it is broadly considered a municipality that protects undocumented immigrants from prosecution for immigration law violations. Opponents of sanctuary cities are most focused on those that refuse to turn over illegal immigrants who have been arrested for another crime.
Requests by Immigration and Customs Enforcement to detain an inmate typically come after a suspect has been booked and fingerprinted and their fingerprints submitted to the FBI. For State College and the rest of Centre County, that happens at the Centre County Correctional Facility. The county has no sanctuary policy.
The borough council resolution ‘did not establish State College as a so-called ‘Sanctuary City.’ Neither did the resolution incorporate principles typically associated with Sanctuary City status,’ the release from the borough stated.
This resolution, and one in December that condemned ‘Islamophobia, anti-Semitism, xenophobia, sexism and homophobia, in rhetoric or action,’ were value statements, Council President Tom Daubert said.
‘Council adopted both of these resolutions because we believe that it is important to affirm our commitment to inclusion, equity and Justice,” Daubert said.
“Although these resolutions do not establish State College as a Sanctuary City, we strongly support principles of equity, inclusion and justice for all persons in State College,’ added Mayor Elizabeth Goreham. ‘It is important that all residents and visitors in our community, including immigrants, know that this is a safe and welcoming community.”
Shoba Sivaprasad Wadhia, an immigration law attorney and founding director of Penn State Law’s Center for Immigrants’ Rights Clinic, who helped compose the resolution, told StateCollege.com that she does not believe the president’s executive order would apply to State College.
She said it’s unclear how the government will define ‘sanctuary city’ but that it appears based on the order that it will be defined as those that refuse to comply with the federal law which essentially prohibits state and local law enforcement from being restricted in the sharing of information about immigration status with federal authorities.
‘The State College Borough resolution does none of these things,’ Wadhia said. ‘The resolution passed by the State College Borough outlines the position of the borough on immigration enforcement, reaffirms that immigration is a federal responsibility, and also recognizes that its policies must stay within the bounds of the law. Further, it is unconstitutional for the federal government to force states and localities to enforce immigration law.’
She added that the order is ambiguous about what federal funding would be withheld from sanctuary cities or how.
‘The ambiguity in the executive order about federal funding only adds to the number of legal and policy questions that are yet to be answered by the plain language,’ Wadhia said. ‘Spending power belongs to Congress. Congress hasn’t linked 1373 [the law on local law enforcement sharing immigration status information with federal authorities] to funding or funding to 1373. Also, there is a need for clarity. Funding restrictions must be unambiguous and also germane to the reason they are being upheld.’
