Abstract
The article argues for an increase in de facto already claimed city sovereignty. It situates the discussion, first in the historical context of city-state relationships, and second, in the current urban crises in the United States tied to the sanctuary city movement, then examines legal grounds for devolution of power to cities, before discussing the legal concepts of “urban commons” and “city power”, finally outlining constraints facing increasingly sovereign cities. The article argues that current legal literature on “urban commons” and “city power” needs a stronger normative lens and better conceptualization of urban inequality, redistribution, and publicness. Moreover, if cities are to assume greater capacity to govern and to ensure life, liberty, and the sustainability of their populations, they have to overcome serious constraints in the four domains outlined in the article: (1) surveillance and control of urban space, (2) privatization of public space, (3) the rise of the luxury city, large-scale developments, megaprojects, and (4) homelessness.
Highlights
Cities are schoolhouses of democracy, argued Tocqueville and “can retain their ability to enable people to learn the skills of self-government only if they are given sufficient power to make decisions that have tangible consequences for the quality of local life” [1] (p. 50)
This can most poignantly be seen in the example of sanctuary cities in the United States that have posed a challenge to federal rule in the domain of immigration
Current rebel cities show that the sovereign has offended urban standards of justice, that the undocumented, refugees, and asylum seekers and their families have started to develop durable ties with the social community of the U.S, that urban political leadership, namely the mayors of American cities, have a stake in at least symbolically defending this population, and that the United States national leadership is increasingly vulnerable to the mounting opposition including by the legal system
Summary
Cities are schoolhouses of democracy, argued Tocqueville and “can retain their ability to enable people to learn the skills of self-government only if they are given sufficient power to make decisions that have tangible consequences for the quality of local life” [1] (p. 50). It is critical that today’s protest movements have assumed an urban dimension with cities emerging as chief locations of political action and progressive policies ranging from minimum wage to immigration This can most poignantly be seen in the example of sanctuary cities in the United States that have posed a challenge to federal rule in the domain of immigration. Current rebel cities show that the sovereign has offended urban standards of justice, that the undocumented, refugees, and asylum seekers and their families have started to develop durable ties with the social community of the U.S, that urban political leadership, namely the mayors of American cities, have a stake in at least symbolically defending this population, and that the United States national leadership is increasingly vulnerable to the mounting opposition including by the legal system. Resistance and protests on the part of sanctuary cities may be the current weapons of the very weakest
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
