Sanctuary in a Trumpist Context: Creating Spaces of Democratic Exception

Abstract

This paper first identifies the necessity for sanctuary as a form of protest against the discretionary and often absolute forms of power shaping the current immigration system, particularly as it affects undocumented immigrants. Although the plenary power doctrine has removed legal personhood from immigrants at the federal level since the late 1800s, immigrants’ rightlessness and vulnerability to detention and deportation has grown since Trump was elected. It distinguishes between a sanctuary city and church-based sanctuary, holding that the latter fits more ancient conceptions of sanctuary. Faith-based sanctuary is also more radical than sanctuary cities, challenging sovereign power over immigrants who are largely rightless. The discourse of “earned citizenship” holds that undocumented immigrants must make amends to U.S. society and pay back taxes as well as earning the trust of the American public. In contrast, church-based sanctuary exposes the faulty logic of such claims, educating the public about the undocumented individual’s existing ties to the community and his/her contributions. In humanizing the legal non-person, church-based sanctuary practices explode conventional binary between citizen and foreigner, problematizing claims of merit on the one side and lack of deservingness or alien status on the other.