Sanctuary Jurisdictions

There is no legal definition of a sanctuary jurisdiction. The term describes states and localities that limit cooperation with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, for example by refusing to hold people in jail past their release date on an ICE request, called a detainer, by barring police from asking about immigration status, or by restricting ICE access to jails. Some trace the idea to churches that sheltered Central American refugees in the 1980s. California, Illinois, New York, and cities such as Chicago, Los Angeles, and New York City have such policies, while states including Texas and Florida ban them.

The Supreme Court's anticommandeering rule, from cases such as Printz v. United States in 1997 and Murphy v. NCAA in 2018, says the federal government cannot force state and local officials to carry out federal programs, so localities may decline to help, though they may not obstruct federal agents. Federal officers can still arrest people anywhere. Many sheriffs in other states have signed 287(g) agreements to work with ICE, and those agreements grew to more than 1,000 in 2025.

In 2025 the administration ordered funding cuts for sanctuary jurisdictions, published a list of 35 states, cities, and counties in August, and sued several. On August 22, 2025, a federal judge blocked funding cuts to 34 cities and counties, and other courts limited similar efforts, as in the first Trump term. Supporters of sanctuary policies say they build trust so immigrants report crimes and that local police should not do federal work. Opponents say they release dangerous people instead of handing them to ICE and defy federal law.