From Immigrants to Trans Communities: The Expanding Need for Sanctuary

A brief overview of the role of sanctuary cities and the communities they serve

(Photo by Jaime Flores Photography)

Sanctuary cities have long been recognized for their protective policies toward undocumented immigrants, particularly within Latino communities. In recent years, a similar movement has emerged to safeguard transgender individuals, leading to the establishment of “transgender sanctuary cities.” Both initiatives share a common goal: creating safe havens for marginalized groups by limiting cooperation with higher authorities that may enforce policies that are harmful.

The concept of sanctuary cities in the United States began to emerge in the 1980s, largely in response to the country’s foreign policy in Central America, which contributed to an influx of refugees fleeing violence and civil war. Initially, religious groups and churches were the main actors in the Sanctuary Movement, providing refuge to asylum seekers from Central America. These religious groups opposed deportations and advocated for a more compassionate approach to immigration, which led to the protection of undocumented immigrants from federal enforcement.

By the late 1980s and early 1990s, local governments in cities with large immigrant populations, such as San Francisco and Los Angeles, began to adopt policies that formalized sanctuary efforts. These policies typically restricted local law enforcement from inquiring about an individual’s immigration status or cooperating with federal agencies like U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The goal was to foster trust between immigrant communities and local authorities, encouraging people to report crimes and access essential public services without fear of deportation.

Federal laws in the 1990s, such as the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act and the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act, made it easier for local law enforcement to collaborate with federal immigration authorities. In response, many cities adopted sanctuary policies to maintain local control over immigration enforcement and protect immigrant residents. These policies sought to prioritize community safety and public welfare over strict federal immigration mandates.

The sanctuary city debate intensified in the 2000s and 2010s, particularly during discussions surrounding DACA and the more aggressive immigration policies under the Trump administration. Sanctuary cities became a central issue in national politics, with supporters arguing for the protection of undocumented immigrants and opponents citing concerns about undermining federal law. Today, hundreds of cities across the U.S. have some form of sanctuary policy, continuing the legacy of local governments seeking to balance immigration enforcement with the protection of vulnerable communities.

[Read more about Immigrant Sanctuary Cities here]

Similarly, transgender sanctuary cities have emerged in response to increasing legislative measures perceived as discriminatory against transgender individuals. For instance, Worcester, Massachusetts, declared itself a sanctuary city this week for transgender and LGBTQ+ individuals, explicitly refusing to cooperate with entities infringing on the rights of these communities (This was a 9-2 vote after weeks of emails to city council members, rallies, and protests. Read more by the best written local column - Worcester Sucks and I love it) This move was a response to the outcry of transgender and gender-diverse community members who feared of increased attacks after new federal policies restricting gender-affirming care and participation in sports were enacted by the current president.

The parallels between these two types of sanctuary cities are evident in their foundational principles. Both seek to provide refuge for vulnerable populations by enacting local policies that counteract broader governmental actions deemed harmful. In the case of Latino sanctuary cities, the focus is on protecting undocumented immigrants from federal immigration enforcement. Transgender sanctuary cities, on the other hand, aim to shield transgender individuals from state or federal laws that restrict their rights or access to healthcare.

Critics of sanctuary cities argue that such policies can lead to legal conflicts and may undermine the enforcement of federal laws. For example, the Trump administration has taken legal action against states like New York over their sanctuary policies, asserting that they hinder federal immigration efforts. Similarly, transgender sanctuary cities may face challenges from state governments, especially in regions where state laws conflict with local protections for transgender individuals.

Despite these challenges, sanctuary cities for both undocumented immigrants and transgender individuals emphasize the importance of local autonomy in policymaking. By asserting control over how laws are enforced within their jurisdictions, these cities aim to protect residents from external policies that may not reflect the community’s values or best interests. This local governance approach allows municipalities to address the specific needs of their populations, fostering inclusivity and safety.

The emergence of transgender sanctuary cities also highlights the evolving understanding of sanctuary as a concept. Originally associated primarily with immigration, sanctuary now encompasses a broader range of protections for various marginalized groups. This evolution reflects a growing recognition of the diverse threats faced by different communities and the need for tailored local responses to ensure their safety and well-being.

Both Latino and transgender sanctuary cities represent efforts by local governments to create safe spaces for marginalized populations. By limiting cooperation with higher authorities on specific issues, these cities strive to protect residents from policies that are harmful, emphasizing the role of local governance in safeguarding human rights and promoting inclusivity.

Personal Reflection:

Lately, I can’t stop thinking about how the rise of sanctuary cities reflects a powerful need to protect communities facing relentless discrimination. It shows how urgently we need to protect communities that are constantly facing discrimination. With so many harmful policies and toxic rhetoric putting marginalized groups at risk, local governments have such an important role in keeping people safe. I can’t help but notice the parallels between sanctuary cities for Latino immigrants and those for transgender people—it’s the same kind of threat, whether it’s immigration enforcement or laws that target gender rights. Seeing this connection really drives home the bigger issue: how vulnerable populations are often under attack in the name of “law and order.”

What’s especially troubling is that these groups have to rely on sanctuary policies just to live without fear. How do people stay safe before things get worse? The fight for sanctuary isn’t just about laws or policies; it’s about making sure people’s dignity is respected and that no one has to hide who they are. Looking back at history, it’s clear that when local communities step up against injustice, it sparks real change and challenges the systems that oppress people. The fact that we’re now seeing transgender sanctuary cities feels like a sign that more people are realizing that safety and inclusion should extend beyond immigration, and include anyone facing targeted discrimination.

I’d love to hear from you…

Subscribe to our sister account, Stories That Grow