On Jan. 22, Huntington Beach declared itself a non-sanctuary city, going against California’s sanctuary city status, claiming to prevent crime by curbing immigration. By tying itself closely to conservative politics above all else, the city’s illogical conservatism ignores statistics about sanctuary cities, directly compromising the citizen wellbeing it claims to value.
Huntington Beach has aligned itself with Republican efforts to frame sanctuary cities as threats to American citizens, despite evidence that sanctuary cities experience 33.5 fewer crimes per 10,000 residents than non-sanctuary counterparts, according to the Center for American Progress. This politically motivated stance follows anti-immigration ideology the conservative party has long propagated and championed amongst voters. Directly neglecting data and information, the city only harms immigrants instead of fixing the root cause of crime.
California’s sanctuary cities, such as San Francisco, have successfully maintained public safety through prioritizing and addressing common causes of crime, such as economic instability. For example, since prioritizing housing initiatives and community employment programs, San Francisco has maintained lower violent crime rates compared to other non-sanctuary cities. In Orange County, Huntington Beach’s decision serves as a potential warning sign setting precedence for other counties to follow; conservative-leaning ones, such as those encompassing Cypress are at particular risk, by pandering to political views, at the expense of residents’ safety.
Officers supporting ICE efforts must then divert their attention from crimes as well as their budget towards crime prevention or police training to public safety to immigration, a federal jurisdiction handled by ICE. In Harris County, Texas, the local government spent over $45 million of their budget to detain, house, and process immigrants for ICE. Diverting officers and resources not only strains local budgets, but also weakens community trust, making it harder for law enforcement to address crime within the area.
Proponents of Huntington Beach’s decision may argue that supporting immigration enforcement ensures security over potential criminal activities associated with illegal immigration. However, this stance overlooks the impact on immigrant communities and the unintended consequences of directing funds toward enforcement. There is simply no statistical correlation between illegal immigration and crime; the city should instead improve the citizenship experience to make it faster and safer if they are truly focused on making the city a safer place.
The city’s decisions and impacts reflect the broader weaponization of immigration policy as a political tool, discarding the safety of its citizens. If other Orange County cities follow suit, they risk prioritizing political symbolism over effective crime prevention, destroying the livelihoods of both immigrants and the citizens they are elected to support. Through engaging with representatives and community meetings, collective action can revise neighborhoods into more inclusive communities.
