Editorial:
The recent shooting death of Kathryn Steinle, 32, in San Francisco has set off a fire storm of controversy over sanctuary cities. Steinle was allegedly killed by an undocumented immigrant, Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez, 45, who had a criminal record and had been deported several times.
Kathryn’s death came on the heels of Donald Trump’s racist comments portraying people coming from Mexico as “rapists” and “murderers.” It is unfortunate that this shooting has encouraged Trump and the right wing segment of our society to spew even more racist sentiments and attack “sanctuary” cities.
The policy of establishing a sanctuary for immigrants was first initiated in 1979 in Los Angeles. There is no legal definition of a sanctuary city per se. But sanctuary cities typically have chosen not to work as de facto immigration officers. For example, the local city police, in regards to petty crimes, investigate the crime and do not ask the question of immigration status. Further, they don’t hold the immigrants for immigration pick up.
The intent of a sanctuary city is to help immigrant and limited-English speaking communities cooperate with the local authorities without fear and mistrust of the criminal justice system.
Lopez-Sanchez had several crimes on his record, but no recent convictions for violent crimes, according to the San Francisco Sheriff’s Department. He claims that he found the gun, wrapped in a t-shirt under a pier, and it fired accidentally, shooting the young woman in the stomach as she was taking pictures with her father.
The Lopez-Sanchez incident has fanned the flames of racial discontent because he stated that, as an illegal immigrant, he returned to San Francisco because he knew that the city was a sanctuary city.
For 26 years, San Francisco has been one of the country’s “sanctuary cities” that doesn’t cooperate with immigration authorities to detain and hand over undocumented immigrants. However, if an immigrant is charged with a serious crime, the cover of a sanctuary is off the table and the question of immigration status is determined.
Although the shooting was reported to be an accident, it does not make the loss of life any easier to deal with, that someone so young and innocent lost their life this way is a tragedy.
However, it is ridiculous to blame the loss of Kathryn Steinle’s life on San Francisco’s sanctuary status!
To lay the blame at the feet of a sanctuary city is wrong, but it does make the argument for a sanctuary city that much harder.
This incident is an isolated one and does not take away from the intent of the policy. But for the right wing Republican Party, it will only bolster their argument for more border security and they will continue their ongoing fight against sanctuary cities.