# Sanctuary cities and federal vs. local law **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [September 2, 2015, 3:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sanctuary-cities-and-federal-vs-local-law/729671 "2015-09-02T03:20:58Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 15\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2015, 3:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sanctuary-cities-and-federal-vs-local-law/729671/1 "2015-09-02T03:20:58Z")
This isn’t a debate about illegal immigration, or whether sanctuary cities for illegal immigrants are right or wrong, or a good or bad thing. Rather, I’m asking…isn’t there some legal principle that the higher law overrules the lower law, or something to that effect? Like, doesn’t federal law overrule state law, and state law overrule city law? (does it?) So if so, how exactly do sanctuary cities like San Francisco operate? If city law is clashing with state or federal law, why hasn’t city law been struck down? ---
**Author:** ![dofe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/7ba0ec/32.png) [@dofe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dofe)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2015, 3:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sanctuary-cities-and-federal-vs-local-law/729671/2 "2015-09-02T03:27:14Z")
When people talk about “sanctuary cities,” they generally are referring to cities that have enacted policies or law that provide that city officials (e.g., police officers) will not inquire into an individual’s immigration status. To the extent such laws do not directly contradict Federal immigration laws, there is simply no conflict that would implicate the supremacy clause. ---
**Author:** ![RadicalPi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/radicalpi/32/9806_2.png) [@RadicalPi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RadicalPi)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2015, 3:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sanctuary-cities-and-federal-vs-local-law/729671/3 "2015-09-02T03:33:11Z")
Also, remember that state and local police forces are usually under no obligation to enforce federal laws. So, if the feds don’t want these sanctuary cities, they are more than welcome to enforce the immigration laws themselves. It often turns out though that doing so is politically inexpedient. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2015, 3:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sanctuary-cities-and-federal-vs-local-law/729671/4 "2015-09-02T03:40:15Z")
> [@dofe](#): > > When people talk about “sanctuary cities,” they generally are referring to cities that have enacted policies or law that provide that city officials (e.g., police officers) will not inquire into an individual’s immigration status. To the extent such laws do not directly contradict Federal immigration laws, there is simply no conflict that would implicate the supremacy clause. That’s exactly right. It’s not like they are dodging some law, they have just decided that it’s best for them and what they have to do to not ask. One significant reason is they want anyone, regardless of his immigration status, to feel comfortable reporting crimes or cooperating with the police to solve crimes. There might be a problem if the cops intentionally impeded a federal investigation, but they are not obligated to do the feds work for them. ---
**Author:** ![russian\_heel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f05b48/32.png) [@russian\_heel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/russian_heel)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2016, 8:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sanctuary-cities-and-federal-vs-local-law/729671/5 "2016-11-11T08:50:24Z")
Rather than start a new thread there’s two issues that confuse me: 1. What political benefit is there to becoming a Sanctuary City? I get if your LA where there’s a huge Latino population. But some of the cities, I just don’t get it. There are very few Latinos in some of these towns. 2. Apparently there is link to being a Sanctuary City and the 4th Amendment, such as in s recent [Philly.com](http://Philly.com) article about Philadelphia being one. I’m all in if someone can explain precisely what that link is. I think this is a topic most Americans are ignorant about, including me. But one of Trumps First 100 Day Initatives is to cut off Federal funding for SC so I figured I best get educated damned quick. ---
**Author:** ![yellowjacketcoder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/4bbf92/32.png) [@yellowjacketcoder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yellowjacketcoder)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2016, 2:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sanctuary-cities-and-federal-vs-local-law/729671/6 "2016-11-11T14:28:04Z")
> [@russian\_heel](#): > > 1. What political benefit is there to becoming a Sanctuary City? I get if your LA where there’s a huge Latino population. But some of the cities, I just don’t get it. There are very few Latinos in some of these towns. If your city’s population believe in a more open immigration policy (and disagrees with the federal immigration policy) it’s a way of throwing red meat to your base without really changing much of reality. ---
**Author:** ![even\_sven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/dfb087/32.png) [@even\_sven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/even_sven)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2016, 2:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sanctuary-cities-and-federal-vs-local-law/729671/7 "2016-11-11T14:40:55Z")
> [@russian\_heel](#): > > What political benefit is there to becoming a Sanctuary City? I get if your LA where there’s a huge Latino population. But some of the cities, I just don’t get it. There are very few Latinos in some of these towns. It’s a practical decision. Creating areas where people are afraid to interact with the law enforcement or access government services is not a good thing for a city. They d ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2016, 2:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sanctuary-cities-and-federal-vs-local-law/729671/8 "2016-11-11T14:42:49Z")
Damn, they got **even sven.** ---
**Author:** ![watchwolf49](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9c0ed/32.png) [@watchwolf49](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/watchwolf49)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2016, 2:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sanctuary-cities-and-federal-vs-local-law/729671/9 "2016-11-11T14:45:26Z")
Wow, _la migra_ grabbed **even sven** in mid-post … ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2016, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sanctuary-cities-and-federal-vs-local-law/729671/10 "2016-11-11T15:11:38Z")
> [@Velocity](#): > > Rather, I’m asking…isn’t there some legal principle that the higher law overrules the lower law, or something to that effect? Like, doesn’t federal law overrule state law, and state law overrule city law? (does it?) The Supremacy Clause says federal law (even mere regulations) overrides conflicting state law - even a state constitution - under most circumstances. Most state constitutions provide that state legislation supersedes any contrary municipal or county legislation, except for some states which have “charter counties” which can legislate contrary to state law in some areas. States have no inherent power to enforce federal law. Congress must authorize them to do so (as they have to a limited degree in the case of immigration violations). However, by the same token, the states cannot be _compelled_ to enforce federal criminal law; [Congress can’t tell a county sheriff what to do](https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/95-1478.ZS.html). Whether a state can force its subdivisions to enforce its own laws is a state-by-state analysis. ---
**Author:** ![usedtobe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ec9cab/32.png) [@usedtobe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/usedtobe)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2016, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sanctuary-cities-and-federal-vs-local-law/729671/11 "2016-11-11T22:15:41Z")
There are many, many laws on the books, at all levels. It comes down to enforcement. In many cities in CA, the laws concerning marijuana are still there - it’s just that the cities have enacted regulations that tell the Police: Enforcement of these laws are your lowest priority. Quite literally: "Go after some real criminals; leave simple possession by adults alone. When it comes to Immigration, the Federal law is almost always enforced (or not) by State or City police. Sanctuary cities simply tell their police: if the Feds want to check papers, they can - you don’t bother. The Feds would need several hundred thousand agents to enforce INS across the country. And thne, if they are successful, forget your salads, tree nuts, fruits, and salads - there ain’t nobody going to harvest those crops. The crops will die, the farms go belly-up. That will be the scene in the CA Central Valley. On the plus side, there will be space for thousands of economic refugees from the Red States ---
**Author:** ![doreen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/858c86/32.png) [@doreen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doreen)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2016, 12:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sanctuary-cities-and-federal-vs-local-law/729671/12 "2016-11-12T00:05:14Z")
> [@russian\_heel](#): > > Rather than start a new thread there’s two issues that confuse me: > > 1. What political benefit is there to becoming a Sanctuary City? I get if your LA where there’s a huge Latino population. But some of the cities, I just don’t get it. There are very few Latinos in some of these towns. There’s not much of a political benefit- it’s mostly done for practical reasons. You don’t want people afraid to report crimes, you don’t want people walking around with and spreading TB because they are afraid to go to a public clinic , you don’t want to pay for incarcerating people who got a traffic ticket until immigration decides whether they want to pick him up etc. ---
**Author:** ![jtur88](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e9c0ed/32.png) [@jtur88](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jtur88)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2016, 12:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sanctuary-cities-and-federal-vs-local-law/729671/13 "2016-11-12T00:13:09Z")
Here’s a map of sanctuary cities, counties and states, for anyone who is interested: > **[Map: Sanctuary Cities, Counties, and States](https://cis.org/Map-Sanctuary-Cities-Counties-and-States)** > > Updated 10/4/22: Map and list of sanctuary cities, counties, and state that are obstructing federal immigration enforcement. ---
**Author:** ![even\_sven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/dfb087/32.png) [@even\_sven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/even_sven)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2016, 2:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sanctuary-cities-and-federal-vs-local-law/729671/14 "2016-11-12T02:05:10Z")
> [@doreen](#): > > There’s not much of a political benefit- it’s mostly done for practical reasons. You don’t want people afraid to report crimes, you don’t want people walking around with and spreading TB because they are afraid to go to a public clinic , you don’t want to pay for incarcerating people who got a traffic ticket until immigration decides whether they want to pick him up etc. This is what I was trying to write. Cities don’t want to deal with the problems that are created when people are afraid to interact with the government, and acting like an extension of the border patrol is a lot of extra work and expense for no real benefit for a city. ---
**Author:** ![md2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/73ab20/32.png) [@md2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md2000)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2016, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sanctuary-cities-and-federal-vs-local-law/729671/15 "2016-11-12T18:44:08Z")
> [@even\_sven](#): > > This is what I was trying to write. Cities don’t want to deal with the problems that are created when people are afraid to interact with the government, and acting like an extension of the border patrol is a lot of extra work and expense for no real benefit for a city. Even basic things - like getting a driver’s license or registering your car (which of course would include no insurance for accidents)… you don’t want people flouting that law because it’s safer than going to a government office. Then there’s simple bylaws - you don’t want people afraid to report firetrap buildings because the police will haul them away, you don’t want people working and not getting paid, etc. A lot of how our cities function relies on people expecting that they can report problems to authorities.