As the Trump administration threatens to increase deportations, Richmond officials are working to quickly bolster city sanctuary policies meant to protect local immigrants.
The Richmond City Council passed an item on Jan. 28 directing the city attorney’s office to review Richmond’s existing protections for undocumented immigrants, study sanctuary laws in other cities, and recommend additional measures.
Although specific changes are yet to be decided, council members who spoke to Richmondside said they hope to reinforce Richmond’s existing sanctuary ordinances by adopting practices in other cities, including in the Bay Area.
“The sanctuary city policy that we have is really weak,” District 6 council member Claudia Jimenez said. “We want to actually strengthen it and are looking at San Francisco and Chicago as examples. We want to see what is coming and what we can do to prevent (enforcement).”
Richmond’s original sanctuary ordinance, passed in 1990, limits police and city employees from working directly with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and instructs staff to forward any requests from that agency to the city manager or chief of police for review, and also notify the city council.
The second ordinance, created in 2018 during Trump’s first term, prohibits city contracts with data companies that also do business with ICE.
Other city’s sanctuary policies go further. For example, San Francisco prohibits city employees from assisting ICE similar to Richmond, but also bars them from asking about a person’s immigration status when providing city services or benefits. In addition, San Francisco only allows local law enforcement agencies to notify ICE about an individual’s release from custody in limited circumstances, and prevents holding individuals on immigration detainers after they become eligible for release.
As city officials consider how to strengthen local immigration protections, they’re confronted with the possibility that doing so could have unintended repercussions. The Trump administration has made clear its desire to weaken state and city sanctuary laws like those in California by threatening to cut federal funding and other tactics.
State Bill 54, also known as the California Values Act, was signed into law in 2017 under then-Gov. Jerry Brown and prohibits state and local authorities from investigating, interrogating, or arresting people for immigration enforcement purposes. It also limits — but does not prohibit — police cooperation with federal immigration officials.
District 2 council member Cesar Zepeda told Richmondside on Feb. 2 during a rally on 23rd Street supporting Richmond’s undocumented community that he is hopeful the city can find ways to increase its support of undocumented residents, but understands that doing so runs the risk of Richmond becoming a target of the Trump administration.
“We have to make sure that whatever we do, we do so to protect and not incur the wrath of Trump,” Zepeda said, adding that more public education is needed to inform residents of the city’s current policies and what can and can’t happen if ICE were to come in.
Zepeda pointed to Chicago as a cautionary tale of what could happen to cities with immigration practices that stand in the way of the administration’s objectives. Last week, the U.S. Department of Justice sued Chicago over its sanctuary policies.
“You would then [have to] fight this much bigger thing,” he said. “I would rather protect and fight when needed and only if needed because we don’t have those same resources (like Chicago).”
One thing that cities like Richmond could theoretically do to strengthen their sanctuary city ordinances is establish clear repercussions for city employees who might collaborate with ICE, including police, said Anthony Pahnke, an associate professor in San Francisco State University’s International Relations Department.
“People have sued police and [others] who have broken those ordinances” and been successful, Pahnke noted.
He cited one example in San Francisco, in which an undocumented man from El Salvador settled with the city for $190,000 in 2019 — four years after he went into a police station to retrieve his stolen car and was arrested by federal immigration agents outside.
Although Richmond has an ordinance prohibiting city employees from working directly with ICE, he said it lacks teeth. “If you break an ordinance, what happens?” he said.
During the recent council meeting, resident Sarah Cantor suggested the city could create “safe zones” around the city.
“I’d like to see some additions of physical sanctuaries or safe zones for our neighbors to be in at times when, potentially, raids are coming through,” she said. “I’m glad we are as a city doing everything we can so that our residents stay here.”
During the Biden administration, ICE adhered to a “sensitive area” policy that prohibited enforcement in locations such as schools (including K-12 and college campuses), medical and mental healthcare facilities, places of worship, children’s gathering spots, social service establishments, courts, disaster and emergency response locations, religious and civil ceremonies (such as funerals, weddings, and rosaries) and areas with active parades, demonstrations or rallies.
That policy was rescinded by the Trump administration on Jan. 20.
“Criminals will no longer be able to hide in America’s schools and churches to avoid arrest,” the Department of Homeland Security statement announcing the rescindment reads. “The Trump Administration will not tie the hands of our brave law enforcement, and instead trusts them to use common sense.”
Pahnke said that although Richmond can not impede any federal law enforcement action, the city could still send a message by identifying specific areas — like schools and hospitals — that should be off limits.
“Even if just naming those spaces,” he said. “I think one of the ideas is to draw attention that these are spaces where immigration enforcement shouldn’t happen. That they shouldn’t be going to hospitals, they shouldn’t be going to schools, no matter who you are.”
