Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Fact check: How did sanctuary city policies change from Obama to Trump administration?
1. Summary of the results
The transition from Obama to Trump marked a significant shift in approach to sanctuary cities, though both administrations maintained strict immigration enforcement. The Obama administration actually deported 3 million people - more than any previous president [1]. The Trump administration took a more confrontational stance, implementing several key changes:
- Issued executive orders to withhold federal funding from sanctuary jurisdictions [2]
- Threatened civil and criminal action against non-compliant officials [2]
- Removed temporary protected status for migrants [3]
- Conducted targeted ICE raids in sanctuary cities like Chicago and New York [3]
- Instructed the DOJ to sue jurisdictions with immigration-friendly policies [3]
2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints
Several important contextual elements are worth noting:
- There is no federal legal definition of what constitutes a "sanctuary city" [4]
- Sanctuary policies generally focus on limiting local law enforcement's cooperation with federal immigration authorities [4]
- Even during Obama's tenure, some cities were in "open rebellion" against federal immigration enforcement [5]
- The Trump administration proposed additional measures including:
- Mandatory E-Verify compliance
- Potential limitations on state visa allocations for non-compliant jurisdictions [5]
3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement
The question itself might suggest a simple binary shift between administrations, when the reality is more complex:
- The perception that Obama was "soft" on immigration is incorrect, as his administration conducted extensive deportations [1]
- The Trump administration's approach was more publicly confrontational, leading to specific legal battles with:
- Illinois
- Chicago
- Cook County [3]
Those benefiting from various narratives include:
- Law enforcement agencies: Seeking clarity on their role and jurisdiction
- Immigration advocacy groups: Using the contrast between administrations to highlight policy impacts
- Political parties: Using the sanctuary city debate to energize their base and shape public opinion
- Federal agencies: Particularly ICE, which saw its role and authority expand under Trump's "largest deportation force" initiative [2]