Quantcast
Connect with us

As Trump threatens to ship undocumented immigrants to sanctuary cities, these cities say: We will welcome them

Published

on

Confirming Friday that his administration is considering sending undocumented immigrants en masse to sanctuary cities, President Donald Trump framed the proposal as a threat—but several politicians and rights advocates replied that immigrants would be welcome in those communities.

The president announced that the White House is weighing the proposal hours after the Washington Post reported that it had been considered and then rejected last year.

ADVERTISEMENT

“Due to the fact that Democrats are unwilling to change our very dangerous immigration laws, we are indeed, as reported, giving strong considerations to placing Illegal Immigrants in Sanctuary Cities only,” Trump tweeted.

At least one sanctuary city mayor, Jim Kenney of Philadelphia, responded that he would happily welcome any number of immigrants sent to his city.

ADVERTISEMENT

“The city would be prepared to welcome these immigrants just as we have embraced our immigrant communities for decades,” Kenney said in a statement. “This White House plan demonstrates the utter contempt that the Trump administration has for basic human dignity.”

Mayor Libby Schaaf of Oakland expressed pride in her city’s status as one that bars all city employees from cooperating with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and condemned the president for focusing his immigration agenda on keeping immigrants out of the United States.

“I am proud to be the mayor of a sanctuary city,” Schaaf told CNN. “We believe sanctuary cities are safer cities. We embrace the diversity in Oakland and we do not think it’s appropriate for us to use local resources to do the government’s failed immigration work.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Much of the response to the Post‘s earlier reporting centered around what an aide to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called the White House’s “despicable” attempt to use human beings as pawns to demonize immigrants.

ADVERTISEMENT

As Libby Watson noted at Splinter, much of the corporate media’s reporting on the plan followed the narrative laid out by the Trump administration—that sending undocumented immigrants to sanctuary cities would be an “attack” on those cities and their Democratic leaders.

“A premise like ‘busing migrants to San Francisco will punish Nancy Pelosi’ is not self-explanatory,” Watson wrote. “I do not immediately understand the mechanism by which releasing a tired, huddled mass of immigrants in cities with massive populations—and cities where asylum approval rates are much higher—would punish their representatives.”

“The framing is left as ‘the presence of migrants in cities will be bad for those cities.’ And in the end, that just does Stephen Miller’s work for him,” she added, referring to Trump’s policy adviser who has pushed for hard-line, xenophobic immigration policies.

ADVERTISEMENT

Julia Carrie Wong, a technology reporter for the Guardian, echoed Watson’s concerns.

“Let’s not concede that having refugees in our cities is something to be threatened by,” Wong tweeted.

ADVERTISEMENT

After Trump announced the plan was again under consideration Friday, critics noted that sending immigrants to sanctuary cities would simply be using the cities and their laws as they were intended.

ADVERTISEMENT


Report typos and corrections to: [email protected].
READ COMMENTS - JOIN THE DISCUSSION
Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

New Republican impeachment strategy goes down in flames before first witness is called

Published

on

Republicans this week released a set of talking points on Ukraine that have already been refuted although the first impeachment hearing isn't until Wednesday.

According to Bloomberg, the talking points were distributed by Republican staffers on the House Intelligence Committee.

The July 25 summary of the call between Trump and Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskiy “shows no conditionality or evidence of pressure.”Both Zelenskiy and Trump have said there was no pressure on the call.The Ukraine government was not aware of a hold on U.S. security assistance at the time of the July 25 call.Trump met with Zelenskiy, although not in the Oval Office, and U.S. security assistance flowed to Ukraine in September 2019 -- both of which occurred without Ukraine investigating Trump’s political rivals.

Democrats contend that the call record shows that President Donald Trump did ask Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky for a quid pro quo when he suggested that military aid would flow after Ukraine did a "favor" by investigating former Vice President Joe Biden and his son.

Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

Inside the extreme right-wing’s plan to take over campus conservatism

Published

on

President Donald Trump's eldest son found himself caught in the middle of an alt-right takeover of a libertarian group with close ties to mainstream conservatism, and video of the encounter provided an embarrassing start to his book tour.

Right-wing activists led by white nationalist Nick Fuentes have been turning up at campus events sponsored by Turning Point USA and other conservative groups to boost their racist, anti-LGBT and anti-Semitic messages, reported The Daily Beast.

Continue Reading
 

Breaking Banner

Career diplomats fear ‘retaliation’ for defying Trump — here’s why they’re doing it anyway

Published

on

In an article for the Washington Post on Tuesday, reporter Lisa Rein analyzed the dire choice facing many career civil servants in the Ukraine scandal — by coming forward, they risk reprisal and public abuse from President Donald Trump.

Nevertheless, many, like Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, diplomat William Taylor, and National Security Council official Fiona Hill, are doing so. And Rein broke down how significant this is.

Continue Reading
 
 
Help Raw Story Uncover Injustice. Join Raw Story Investigates for $1 and go ad-free.
close-image