Los Angeles City Council Passes Sanctuary City Ordinance
Ordinance still needs Mayoral approval, additional vote in Council before coming into effect
By Evan Symon, November 20, 2024 1:35 pm
The Los Angeles City Council voted unanimously late on Tuesday to pass a sanctuary city ordinance, officially barring city resources from being used for immigration enforcement, and stopping law enforcement in the city from assisting immigration authorities such as ICE.
Currently in California, the entire state has sanctuary protections. Passed in 2017 and signed into law in 2018, Senate Bill 54 prohibits state and local law enforcement agencies in California from assisting federal immigration authorities. By not allowing state law enforcement money or manpower being used for immigration enforcement, it in effect created a sanctuary for illegal immigrants who were arrested. While they can still be punished under California law, SB 54 halted or delayed outright deportation.
Many states and cities subsequently followed California’s lead, including New York, New Jersey, Washington state, Chicago, and Philadelphia. Currently 13 states are considered sanctuary states, with California the only one bordering Mexico to be one, albeit with New Mexico having many counties and cities offering sanctuary protections as well. For the city of Los Angeles, they had been fine with the California law, albeit with a few tweaks. Former Mayor Eric Garcetti created a executive directive in 2019 that gave more protections for immigrants. And, in the wake of the George Floyd incident in 2020, the Los Angeles Police Department created a special order so that, during arrests, officers couldn’t ask about someone’s immigration status.
Cities like New York City and Chicago, inundated with migrants flocking to their cities and putting a severe strain on resources, prompted Los Angeles to begin looking into a sanctuary ordinance last year. In addition to making the LAPD’s special order a part of city law, the ordinance aimed to “prohibit any city resources, property or personnel from being utilized for any federal immigration enforcement”. It also formally bars city government cooperation with federal immigration authorities such as ICE in “execution of their duties as it pertains to immigration enforcement.” Essentially it copies state protections and then goes a step further.
The election of Donald Trump earlier this month prompted Bass and Soto to fast track the ordinance so that it could be in place before inauguration day. Shortly afterwards, Bass announced that she was now expediting the ordinance to push it so that it is in place before Trump’s inauguration. This led to Tuesday, where the Los Angeles City Council pushed the ordinance past it’s largest hurdle by voting to pass it unanimously.
“We’re going to send a very clear message that the city of Los Angeles will not cooperate with ICE in any way,” said councilman Hugo Soto-Martinez on Tuesday. “We want people to feel protected and be able to have faith in their government and that women can report domestic violence, crimes.”
Councilman Bob Blumenfield added that “We are hardening our defenses in the face of Trump’s election. We know there is a target on our back from this president-elect.
Passage of the ordinance
However, the ordinance is expected to do very little. In addition to the state law and LAPD ordinances that already cover what the sanctuary city ordinance has in place, the sanctuary city ordinance cannot stop ICE or other federal agencies from performing their jobs. Instead, lawmakers said that the ordinance will help illegal immigrants feel protected, help them feel comfortable coming forward to report crimes, and use city services without the threat of deportation or being apprehended.
Opponents have said that the Trump immigration laws are targeting immigrants who came to the country illegally and are committing crimes. Many have also reiterated that, without local help, agencies like ICE will just send even more agents to areas with sanctuary city protections.
“A country without secure borders isn’t a country at all,” Republican Party of Los Angeles County communications director Roxanne Hoge said on Wednesday. “So-called sanctuary cities and states sound warm and fuzzy, but the protections they offer aren’t for abuelas getting ice cream, they’re for people who entered the country illegally and committed additional crimes.”
Lawyer James Haines added in a Globe interview on Wednesday, “Yeah, the likely game plan by the incoming Trump administration is to go after illegal immigrants who are also criminals first. That way, local authorities have to work with them since other crimes are a factor. They can also tour making America safer as well as get time to bolster their ranks for when they start going beyond criminals.
“California’s sanctuary law was upheld by an Appeals Court and turned down by the Supreme Court in 2020, so ICE will face some difficulties there, but they’ll like still come right on through. The sanctuary city ordinance, the one passed yesterday, is all but symbolic. Everyone knows those deportations are coming, and some families that I have represented have plans in place who their US born children go to in terms of guardianship should they be deported. That’s just the reality of the situation.
“Best case scenario for them would be if an Ellis Island system is put into place and most people get green cards coming in, but nowadays we have way too many security issues around that for it to be feasible.”
With the ordinance passed on Tuesday, the Council will need to pass it again and get approval from Mayor Bass before officially coming into effect.
- San Diego County Board Of Supervisors Chair Nora Vargas To Leave Office Next Month Despite Winning Reelection - December 21, 2024
- Dozens Of Oakland Lawmakers, Business Leaders Urge Rep. Barbara Lee To Run For Mayor In Upcoming Special Election - December 21, 2024
- Backlash Continues Against The Oakland City Council For Approving $100 Million In Budget Cuts - December 20, 2024
As a legal immigrant and naturalized citizen, anyone coming here illegally should be subject to deportation any time, anywhere. Actions have consequences. I would suggest a new executive order on the federal level: anyone here illegally can self-deport within the first six months of 2025, and will be allowed to apply to come back legally at the American embassy or consulate on their country of origin. Anyone who is deported after that time, will be barred from entering the USA for 20 years. There. Illegal aliens can do it right, or suffer the consequences. And any “sanctuary city” or “sanctuary state” who protects illegal alien criminals will be barred from getting federal funds allocated to law enforcement and social benefits. American taxpayers made their votes known on Nov 5, and they should not be financing illegal aliens with their tax dollars.
A plan must be on the table to house and find jobs for those the city is trying to give protection to. I know lots if homeless USA born citizens that are navigating for stability and can’t get help yet. What’s is the plan here. Can anyone be accountable for the missing billions of dollars. Money that was supposed to be allocated for homeless housing. We need transparency, honesty. etc.
Myself and many others reached out to our City Councilman, Tim McOsker to voice our opposition to this. No response. They dont care about us, many Californians are going to be forced to work from home due to the high cost of doing business here. We will take our California salaries and move to other States, where we will be safe
The breakdown of key document categories, such as personal identification, income verification, credit history, and collateral documentation, is particularly helpful. Many first-time borrowers might overlook specific requirements, so having a detailed checklist ensures better preparation and reduces the chances of application delays.
I found the section on income verification documents especially useful. Providing recent pay stubs, tax returns, or bank statements can be tricky for freelancers and self-employed individuals, and the article explains this clearly. The emphasis on maintaining a good credit score and being transparent about existing debts is also an important takeaway for responsible borrowing.
Additionally, the explanation of collateral requirements for secured loans gives potential borrowers a clear understanding of what lenders expect. This insight can help applicants choose between secured and unsecured loan options based on their financial situation.
Overall, this article does a great job simplifying a complicated process with actionable advice. It’s a must-read for anyone looking to secure a loan while avoiding common application mistakes. Well done!