Trump weighs sending ‘unlimited supply’ of immigrants to sanctuary cities

What’s the problem here? If people believe in sanctuary cities, they should welcome becoming a sanctuary.

Maybe this is a time to make the case. Jerusalem has four quarters, and there are places a Jewish person cannot go and places a Muslim person cannot go. Why not have half the city for only legal residents and the other half a sanctuary.

You’d have to really enforce this to make it work.

If, all things being equal, at the end of a year it may be the case that economics are better and crime is not appreciably higher on the sanctuary side. It may work. Enterprising Christians and non-profits might come up with flourishing ministries to reach out to the new community. What a great case study and great argument.

Or it might be that homelessness, crime, vandalism and school problems multiply, along with taxpayer burden for decreased property value, free services, and general unemployment. This along with the inadequate number of state employees to handle the migrant population may necessitate raising taxes substantially. This may drive some people out.

Let’s do this experiment.

Perhaps two cities close in proximity, one that is Sanctuary and one that is Legal Only. Compare results.

It’s a microcosm of America. We should insist on seeing the results.

Please note: I reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive or off-topic.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *