Homework Chapter 3

.docx

School

Georgia State University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

8420

Subject

Political Science

Date

Apr 3, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

2

Uploaded by JusticeThunderFalcon41 on coursehero.com

American Gov 1. What type of federalism is being demonstrated in this case? This case talks about sanctuary cities, cities built with the protection of illegal immigrants in mind, using its local legislative power backed by the Supreme Court to protect unlawful entrants from police immagration officials. 2. Based on the US Constitution, who is right in this case and why? Cite/reference specific article(s) and clause(s). The Supreme Court has long sided with those who fend for sanctuary cities, ruling that because the US Constitution prohibits state governments from having to enforce federal law they don’t want to, immigration detainers cannot force state/local law enforcement to detain undocumented immigrants. In a Washington Post article, author Ilya Somin makes a great point on how federalism works in this case for the benefit of immigration, explaining how lawful constitutional limitations have been a surprising major player in the protection of sanctuary cities, “States and localities have a reputation for being enemies of minority rights, while the federal government is seen as their protector.” (Somin, 2016, p. 5) 3. What would be the top three arguments for being a sanctuary city? Sanctuary cities are good for both the economy, as by providing safe homes they encourage illegal immigrants to find work in their communities; the removal of undocumented workers would be a huge loss to the US economy as Americans largely benefit from immigrant tax payers and consumers. These sanctuaries are also good for society, as their existence promotes social diversification by adding new perspectives, ideas, and cultures to the nation. Most importantly, they provide safety for human beings in need, protecting innocent undocumented immigrants from punishment for undeserving crimes. 4. What would be the top three arguments against being a sanctuary city? The most popular argument against sanctuary cities is that it allows and harbors potentially dangerous individuals to sneak into the country undercover, providing opportunity for terrorism and crime. Another argument is that the acception of undocumented individuals could lead to a higher introduction of potentially dangerous bacterial and viral illnesses into the country, and there are also concerns with the false security sanctuary cities give to people, which can put undocumented people in heightened danger of expulsion. 5. If you were a US Supreme Court justice, and a sanctuary city case was tried before you, why would you be for or against the rights of sanctuary cities to refuse complying with federal immigration laws?
If I were a US Supreme Court justice tied to a sanctuary city case, I would absolutely be for the protection of undoumented immigrants in sanctuary cities, but would need to thoroughly address the flaws that our current system allows.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help