True test for sanctuary yet to come

Some of the dust has started to settle from the rush late last year for various local entities to declare their jurisdictions as sanctuaries.

In short order after the election of Donald Trump, Oregon State University, Benton County, the city of Corvallis and the Corvallis School District all adopted resolutions or issued statements in which they embraced, at least to some extent, the idea that they will not assist with federal government efforts to deport people who are not U.S. citizens.

We don't mean to underestimate the importance of these declarations, especially as they recognize and try to ease the fears among some people that they might be targeted by the actions of a Trump administration. That in itself makes these declarations worthwhile.

But let's not fool ourselves: We are hard-pressed to find, in any of the declarations, anything that wasn't already a matter of policy in these governmental jurisdictions, although the declarations might serve a useful purpose by clarifying existing policies.

Again, there is importance in that, especially if the goal is to quell fear and, even better, to reassure immigrants that they won't have to stand alone through uncertain times.

But we shouldn't be fooled into thinking that these sanctuary declarations, in this community, at this time, are acts of great courage. And let's remember this: It might be unwise to assume that approving the declarations marks the end of the story.

As The Atlantic noted in a recent story on sanctuary campuses, Trump promised on the campaign trail that sanctuary cities (and, presumably, other entities that receive federal money) would "not receive taxpayer dollars."

So, potentially what's at stake here are the millions of federal dollars that flow to entities such as OSU, the city, the county and the school district.

In theory at least, Trump can't do that by himself. It would require approval from Congress, and it could very well be that the entire pool of federal funds is not at risk: The Atlantic story noted that the reason for withholding federal funds from governments likely would have to be somehow linked to the proposed use for the money.

In the past, Democrats have stopped attempts by Republicans to strip away federal funding, but guess what: Republicans are running Congress these days, and the early indications are that GOP senators and representatives are going to give Trump wide sway, at least initially.

Now, that could change as members of Congress get bombarded by calls of protest from cities, counties and universities in their district that stand to lose millions in funding. Members of Congress, regardless of political affiliation, like to be able to bring federal bucks back to their districts, and that could prove more potent than even a series of nasty tweets from the president.

It also could be that there's safety in numbers: For example, some 400 universities, including OSU, have signed onto a petition supporting the idea of sanctuary campuses. And other communities in Oregon and across the nation have embraced the notion of sanctuary.

It could also be that Trump didn't mean what he said during the campaign about immigration. But that seems like a long shot.

So it's not at all out of the question that the administration, with assistance from a compliant Congress, will start to push on this issue. It could be, in fact, that local entities have put millions of dollars at risk by taking this stand.

In short, the time for great courage on the issue of sanctuary may yet come. It's worth asking these questions now: If that time comes, where we will stand — and what are we prepared to sacrifice? (mm)