On Sanctuary: What Is In A Name?

Why A College Campus Should Be A Sanctuary
|
This post was published on the now-closed HuffPost Contributor platform. Contributors control their own work and posted freely to our site. If you need to flag this entry as abusive, send us an email.
Open Image Modal

Map created by Aparna Parikh based on information compiled by Xavier Maciel. Interactive map.

“What’s in a name? That which we call a rose, By any other word would smell as sweet.” Thus wrote Shakespeare in Romeo and Juliet, but names have power as the play’s macabre ending demonstrates. The campus sanctuary movement that has spread across the country since the election has been confronting a question: Does the declaring a “sanctuary” help to protect undocumented students or does it create confusion and misleading promises?

The debate about this question is one of strategy and not goals. Students, faculty, staff and administrators across the country overwhelmingly support undocumented students as various petitions and statements can attest. This is a debate among supporters of immigrant students and there are good people on all sides.

Some argue that using the term “sanctuary” is misleading given that no campus can truly provide protection from federal immigration authorities, and that declaring a sanctuary may in fact heighten the danger faced by undocumented students by indicating that such students are present on a particular campus. Others point to the civil disobedience in the 1980s sanctuary movement or the nineteenth-century Underground Railroad, arguing that such a history confuses people who believe the campus and city sanctuary movements of today imply a similar flouting of the law. They do not. As Michael Olivas, a law professor and current president of the University of Houston, Downtown who has spent his life defending undocumented students has put it in Inside Higher Ed, sanctuary “has no legal meaning and the admonitions are vague and impossible to implement, which will only frustrate people more.”

“Some argue that using the term 'sanctuary' is misleading given that no campus can truly provide protection from federal immigration authorities,”

So why hold on to the sanctuary terminology if it has a confusing history, no legal definition and promises more than it can deliver? The answer lies not in the law or in history, but in our common sense understanding of a sanctuary as a place of refuge and a place to be safe. It is true that college and university campuses do not provide absolute refuge and safety from all danger, as we saw this last week with the brutal knife attack at Ohio State University, but we still think of our campuses as places that should be a refuge from the kinds of crime that are all too common in our cities.

A 2011 Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) memo reaffirmed that schools, just like hospitals and churches, should be seen as “sensitive locations” in which enforcement activities should be avoided. In essence, ICE already treats campuses as sanctuaries where immigration enforcement should be handled with extreme caution.

Declaring a campus a sanctuary does not promise students that they will not face danger, nor does a city’s sanctuary proclamation prevent ICE enforcement. Rather, such a designation is a declaration that these are places where immigrants, even those in the country without authorization, should be respected and treated like brothers and sisters and not criminals. Sanctuary is an aspiration, a statement of values rather than a statement of fact.

Sanctuary is a powerful idea that has mobilized hundreds of thousands of people to sign petitions at more than 150 colleges and universities. Sanctuary is an idea that has convinced 28 college and university presidents to issue statements of support for undocumented students and led the presidents at Portland State University, Reed, Wesleyan, Drake and Pitzer to take the added step of declaring “sanctuary” campuses. Sanctuary is an idea that has motivated almost 300 cities, counties and states to limit their cooperation with federal immigration authorities.

The idea of sanctuary has resonated with county sheriffs across the country who have also proclaimed they would not cooperate with federal immigration enforcement. As Chief Tighe O’Meara recently posted on the Ashland Police Department Facebook page, “I offer this up to clarify a concern that has been brought up, not as a political statement, but as a statement of fact, and of re-assurance to the community: The entire State of Oregon is a ‘sanctuary’ state.”

What Chief O’Meara is saying is that Oregon state law prevents local police from doing the work of federal immigration officers. It’s not at all civil disobedience, but the opposite. The county sheriffs are upholding our state law, declaring that they will not be cajoled into unconstitutionally detaining people simply based on their immigration status. The message is clear: We are upholding the law against unconstitutional enforcement of cruel and unusual immigration regulations.

And what’s so wrong about holding up the banner of sanctuary on a college and university campus? College campuses have long been thought of as sanctuaries from the market-forces of society, as a refuge where diverse people can come together and discuss challenging ideas without coming to fisticuffs.

“Colleges and universities should be spaces where a student’s class, race, gender and sexual orientation does not limit their access to classes or their ability to succeed.”

This idea of colleges as “safe spaces” has been lampooned by the press, and sometimes students’ excessive zeal leaves them open to such accusations, such as when Oberlin students protested the Bahn Mi sandwich in their cafeteria as an inauthentic cultural appropriation. However, most students are not demanding more “authentic” cuisine, but rather campuses where they don’t have to confront racist, sexist and homophobic hate on a daily basis because that is the prerequisite for being able to have the kind of stimulating and controversial conversations that we promise as a hallmark of a liberal arts education.

Colleges and universities should be spaces where a student’s class, race, gender and sexual orientation does not limit their access to classes or their ability to succeed. Too often our campuses reflect the bigotry and hierarchies of our society rather than offer a utopian alternative to them. But that doesn’t mean we should not always strive to be our best selves, to be a sanctuary.

There was once a country that fashioned itself as a sanctuary to the poor and wretched of the rest of the world. In 1883, Emma Lazarus wrote the poem that was emblazoned on the Statue of Liberty:

Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand

A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame

Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name Mother of Exiles.

From her beacon-hand

Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command

The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.

“Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!” cries she

With silent lips. “Give me your tired, your poor,

Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,

The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.

Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,

I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

If the Statue of Liberty is Mother Exile, then sanctuary is at the heart of our country’s highest ideals. We should embrace sanctuary in our cities, counties, states, churches, synagogues and mosques. And yes, colleges and universities should represent the best ideals of America: sanctuary for the poor, the vulnerable, the wretched of the earth.

Support HuffPost

At HuffPost, we believe that everyone needs high-quality journalism, but we understand that not everyone can afford to pay for expensive news subscriptions. That is why we are committed to providing deeply reported, carefully fact-checked news that is freely accessible to everyone.

Whether you come to HuffPost for updates on the 2024 presidential race, hard-hitting investigations into critical issues facing our country today, or trending stories that make you laugh, we appreciate you. The truth is, news costs money to produce, and we are proud that we have never put our stories behind an expensive paywall.

Would you join us to help keep our stories free for all? Your will go a long way.

Support HuffPost

Before You Go

11 Ways Immigration Reform Helps The Economy
Reform Would Help Curb The Deficit(01 of11)
Open Image Modal
Immigration reform would reduce the federal deficit by $2.5 trillion over 10 years, according to an analysis by the American Action Forum, a conservative think tank. (credit:Getty Images)
Expelling Immigrants Is Expensive(02 of11)
Open Image Modal
Expelling the approximately 11 million undocumented immigrants currently in the United States would cost $2.6 trillion over 10 years, according to CNBC. That's because it costs the government more than $8,000 to deport each person. (credit:Getty Images)
Reform Would Help Fix The Social Security Problem(03 of11)
Open Image Modal
Immigration reform would help bolster Social Security because more legal workers would mean more people contributing payroll taxes to its trust fund, according to an analysis from the Social Security administration. Undocumented workers already contribute $15 billion per year to Social Security. (credit:AP)
Immigrants Start Successful Businesses(04 of11)
Open Image Modal
More than a quarter of technology and engineering firms started between 1995 and 2005 had a foreign-born owner, according to The Washington Post. One of the founders of Yahoo!, Jerry Yang, is an immigrant from Taiwan. (credit:AP)
Reform Would Save $410 Billion Over 10 Years(05 of11)
Open Image Modal
The immigration reform bill proposed by the "gang of eight" senators would save $410 billion over a decade, according to an analysis from Gordon Gray, the director of fiscal policy at the American Action Forum. The savings would come largely from a boost in GDP resulting from undocumented immigrants gaining citizenship and in turn likely making more money. (credit:AP)
High-Tech Companies Say Reform Would Boost Their Bottom Line(06 of11)
Open Image Modal
Companies like Microsoft and Google have said that immigration reform would help them by allowing for more H1B visas, a special kind of visa geared toward highly skilled immigrants. The tech giants say they can't find enough qualified people in the U.S. to fill their staffing needs. (credit:AP)
Reform Would Boost The Wages Of Native-Born Workers(07 of11)
Open Image Modal
U.S.-born workers see between a 0.1 and 0.6 percent boost in wages on average with an increase in immigration, according to a report from the Hamilton Project, an economic policy initiative of the nonpartisan Brookings Institution. That's because immigrant workers bring skills with them that complement those of native-born workers, leading to new jobs. (credit:AP)
Immigrants Are Entrepreneurial (08 of11)
Open Image Modal
Immigrants are more than twice as likely as native-born Americans to start new businesses, according to a White House report on immigration reform. (credit:AP)
Reform Would Boost GDP By More Than $1 Trillion Over 10 Years(09 of11)
Open Image Modal
Immigration reform would boost GDP by $1.5 trillion -- or about 1 percent -- over 10 years, according to an estimate from UCLA professor Raul Hinojosa-Ojeda cited by CNBC. (credit:AP)
Immigrants Create Jobs(10 of11)
Open Image Modal
Businesses owned by immigrants created 4.7 million jobs in the U.S. in 2007, according to a White House report on immigration reform. (credit:AP)
Reform Would Bring In More Money Than It Costs In Benefits(11 of11)
Open Image Modal
Though many critics of immigration reform argue against the cost of providing increased public benefits, analysts say higher spending is not a likely consequence. A Congressional Budget Analysis of George W. Bush's 2007 immigration reform proposal found that it would cost the government $23 billion in more public services, but bring in $48 billion in revenue, according to The Washington Post. (credit:Getty Images)