America’s immigration system is a bipartisan disaster, and nowhere is that more evident than in the proliferation of sanctuary cities. These jurisdictions, which actively or passively shield illegal immigrants from federal enforcement, did not sprout up in a vacuum. From their roots in the 1980s to their entrenchment today, both Democrats and Republicans have played pivotal roles—through active legislation, passive inaction, and political opportunism—in allowing sanctuary policies to grow unchecked.
My thesis remains: Sanctuary cities are the root flaw in our broken borders, enabling chaos, crime, and exploitation.
But responsibility is not one-sided; it is a shared failure across party lines. In this deep dive, I will outline the timeline, list key players from both parties, and detail their contributions—active (e.g., passing enabling laws or defending policies) and passive (e.g., failing to enforce or fund despite opposition). Drawing on historical records and recent analyses, we will see how this festering problem reflects decades of political cowardice.
The 1980s: Origins Under Republican Leadership and Early Bipartisan Inaction
The sanctuary movement began in the early 1980s, amid Central American civil wars exacerbated by U.S. foreign policy under President Ronald Reagan (R). Reagan’s administration provided aid to anti-communist regimes in El Salvador and Guatemala, leading to mass refugee flights. However, the U.S. classified most as “economic migrants,” denying asylum to over 97% of applicants. This sparked religious activists to offer “sanctuary,” smuggling and harboring refugees in defiance of federal law. (en.wikipedia.org)
Problem here is that since Wiki seems to only have democrat operatives actively editing its site, hence, it is not the most objective source. But it is a fact, that the spark for sanctuary cities came from Reagan’s foreign policy in Central and South America, and it is also a fact that Reagan did grant amnesty to three million illegal immigrants in the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) and also signed the Simpson-Mazolli bill – a bipartisan bill – that Reagan thought would be a one time fix for the Carter administration’s ongoing problems with Cubans from the Mariel Boatlift and with an influx of Haitians (the worst of their worst). It also included a provision that provided penalties on employers for hiring known illegal aliens. In hindsight most honest observers will conclude it was a failure, and unwittingly Reagan opened the door for the flood of illegal aliens we now have. Reagan’s passive culpability lies in not aggressively prosecuting the movement early on, allowing it to gain traction.
Federal infiltrations like Operation Sojourner led to indictments in 1985-1986, but lenient sentences (probation for most) signaled weak enforcement. (foxnews.com) Democrats, then in opposition, passively enabled growth by criticizing Reagan’s foreign policy without pushing for border reforms. Key Democratic player: Rep. Edward Roybal (D-CA), who supported resolutions in cities like Los Angeles, framing sanctuary as humanitarian. (teenvogue.com) (When I found this reference, it occurred to me that the Democrats controlling the minds of teens and future constituents play the long game – hence, why I included this from a site that normally would be focused on solving acne problems rather than our immigration crisis.)
Two key events from Democrats and Republicans
Actively, local Democratic leaders in San Francisco (under Mayor Dianne Feinstein, D) passed the 1985 “City of Refuge” resolution, barring city aid to federal immigration efforts. (en.wikipedia.org)
Reagan signed the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA), granting amnesty to 3 million but failing to bolster enforcement, creating loopholes for sanctuaries to exploit. (nnirr.org)
Key Republican Players:
- Ronald Reagan (President, 1981-1989): Active in foreign policy that drove migration; passive in allowing sanctuary movement to formalize without strong crackdowns.
- Harold Ezell (INS Western Regional Commissioner): Voiced warnings but oversaw ineffective enforcement. (americanimmigrationcouncil.org)
Key Democratic Players:
- Dianne Feinstein (Mayor of San Francisco, later Senator): Actively institutionalized sanctuary policies locally.
- Edward Roybal (Rep., D-CA): Passively supported through advocacy for refugee rights.
The 1990s: Clinton’s Reforms Fall Short, Enabling Expansion
Under President Bill Clinton (D), the 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA) aimed to increase local-federal cooperation via 287(g) programs. However, Clinton’s active culpability includes signing a bill with loopholes—Section 1373 prohibited restrictions on information sharing, but lacked penalties, allowing sanctuaries to persist. (bipartisanpolicy.org)
Democrats in Congress, like Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA), pushed for immigrant protections that indirectly bolstered non-cooperation. (repository.law.miami.edu)
Republicans, controlling Congress post-1994, passively failed to close gaps despite authoring much of IIRIRA. House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-GA) prioritized welfare reforms over strict enforcement funding. (methodist.edu)
Sanctuaries grew from a handful to dozens, with cities like New York under Mayor Rudy Giuliani (R, later independent) maintaining non-cooperation policies from the 1980s. (en.wikipedia.org)
Key Republican Players:
- Newt Gingrich (House Speaker, R-GA): Passive inaction in not pushing for stronger anti-sanctuary measures.
- Rudy Giuliani (Mayor of NYC, R): Actively continued sanctuary executive orders.
Key Democratic Players:
- Bill Clinton (President, 1993-2001): Active in signing flawed reforms; passive in enforcement.
- Ted Kennedy (Sen., D-MA): Actively advocated for policies protecting immigrants, enabling sanctuary growth.
The 2000s: Bush’s Post 9/11 Focus Diverts Attention
President George W. Bush (R) pushed comprehensive reform in 2006-2007, but bills failed amid bipartisan squabbles. Post-9/11, Bush actively expanded ICE but passively allowed sanctuaries to multiply (from ~40 in 2000 to over 100 by 2008) by not withholding federal funds. (niskanencenter.org) Republicans like Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) co-sponsored amnesty-heavy bills with Democrats, diluting enforcement. (nnirr.org)
Democrats, regaining Congress in 2006, passively blocked tougher measures. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) defended local autonomy, arguing sanctuaries build community trust. (methodist.edu)
Key Republican Players:
- George W. Bush (President, 2001-2009): Passive growth under his watch; active in failed reforms.
- John McCain (Sen., R-AZ): Actively supported bipartisan bills that prioritized paths to citizenship over cracking down on sanctuaries.
Key Democratic Players:
- Nancy Pelosi (House Leader, D-CA): Actively defended sanctuary policies as Speaker.
- Harry Reid (Sen. Majority Leader, D-NV): Passive in not advancing enforcement-only legislation.
The 2010s: Obama’s Deportations vs. Protections
President Barack Obama (D) deported a record 3 million but actively issued executive actions like DACA (2012) and DAPA (2014), which shielded millions and encouraged sanctuary expansions in states like California. (repository.law.miami.edu) Democrats like Gov. Jerry Brown (D-CA) signed the 2017 “sanctuary state” law, actively defying federal authority. (nilc.org) Under President Donald Trump (R, 2017-2021), active opposition included executive orders to defund sanctuaries, but court blocks and incomplete follow-through allowed growth. Republicans in Congress, like Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), introduced anti-sanctuary bills but failed to pass them. (cis.org)
Passive culpability: Trump’s focus on the wall diverted from comprehensive defunding.
Key Republican Players:
- Donald Trump (President, 2017-2021): Active in threats but passive in full execution due to legal hurdles.
- Ted Cruz (Sen., R-TX): Actively sponsored opposition bills.
Key Democratic Players:
- Barack Obama (President, 2009-2017): Active protections via executive action.
- Jerry Brown (Gov., D-CA): Actively enacted state-level sanctuary laws.
The 2020s: Biden’s Reversals and Ongoing Battles
President Joe Biden (D) actively reversed Trump policies, halting deportations and ending 287(g) agreements, leading to a migrant surge straining sanctuaries. (migrationpolicy.org) Democratic mayors like Eric Adams (NYC) and Brandon Johnson (Chicago) defended policies amid crises but sought federal aid, passively perpetuating the system. (nytimes.com) With Trump’s second term (2025-), Republicans actively push crackdowns, but earlier passive failures linger. House Oversight Chair James Comer (R-KY) led 2025 hearings grilling Democratic governors like JB Pritzker (IL) and Kathy Hochul (NY). (oversight.house.gov) Some Democrats, like Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-TX), actively joined Republicans in anti-sanctuary votes in 2025. (foxnews.com)
Key Republican Players:
- James Comer (Rep., R-KY): Actively leading investigations.
- Kelly Ayotte (Gov., R-NH): Actively banned sanctuaries in 2026.
Key Democratic Players:
- Joe Biden (President, 2021-2025): Active reversals fueling growth.
- JB Pritzker (Gov., D-IL): Actively defended sanctuary status.
- Kathy Hochul (Gov., D-NY): Passive in maintaining policies amid criticism.
- Eric Adams (Mayor, D-NYC): Actively upheld but complained about burdens.
Conclusion: A Shared Legacy of Failure
Both parties have contributed to this problem: Democrats through active protections and local defiance, Republicans via passive enforcement and failed reforms. Today, over 600 jurisdictions operate (some estimates over 1000 counties!) as sanctuaries, costing billions and endangering lives. (congress.gov) True reform requires ending federal funding ties and enforcing laws—something neither side has fully embraced. As we move forward, we must demand accountability from all.