Logo image
Back
Mapping the Legal Landscape from 2000 - 2021: State Sanctuary and Anti-Sanctuary Policies, Local Sanctuary Ordinances, and 287(g) Agreements
Journal article - Supervised student publication   Open access   Peer reviewed

Mapping the Legal Landscape from 2000 - 2021: State Sanctuary and Anti-Sanctuary Policies, Local Sanctuary Ordinances, and 287(g) Agreements

Caroline C Kravitz, Kalee Fahndrich, Brent Langellier, Alexandra Eastus, Serenity Lita Lillibridge and Alina Schnake-Mahl
American journal of preventive medicine, Forthcoming
17 Apr 2026
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2026.108311
PMID: 42055265
Featured in Collection :   Research Supported by Drexel Libraries' OA Programs
url
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2026.108311View
Published, Version of Record (VoR) Open Access via Drexel Libraries Read and Publish Program 2026 Open CC BY-NC-ND V4.0

Abstract

In recent years, states and localities have increasingly enacted sanctuary or anti sanctuary laws to, respectively, restrict or encourage law enforcement cooperation with federal immigration enforcement. Such policies drive the magnitude of enforcement in a jurisdiction and may impact the health of immigrants and their communities. This article outlines the creation of a state and local sanctuary and anti-sanctuary policy dataset to inform empirical research analyzing the impact of such policies. The authors systematically searched state (2009-2021) and local (2000-2021) search engines collecting state anti-sanctuary, state sanctuary, city sanctuary, and city/county 287(g) policies; including documentation of state preemption of local policies. State policies were coded to identify provisions that are harmful or protective to immigrants and theoretically linked to health outcomes. Local policies were not coded due to a lack of variation. Between 2009 and 2021, 18 states enacted anti-sanctuary laws, 11 states and Washington DC enacted sanctuary laws, 24 cities enacted sanctuary ordinances, and 176 localities (cities/counties) signed 287(g) agreements. State sanctuary and anti sanctuary laws had some similar provisions but with opposing stances (e.g., requiring versus prohibiting compliance with detainer requests). Anti-sanctuary policies focused on punishment for non-compliance, while no state sanctuary policies included punitive measures. This dataset can inform future empirical research analyzing the impact of state and local immigration policies on health. This dataset also sheds light on trends in immigration legislation including 'punitive' preemption, state government tendencies to enact laws that are ideologically opposed to the current administration, and conservative states using preemption to control progressive localities. Such trends demonstrate that the local policymaker role in the U.S. is changing. This change will impact health equity as localities may be discouraged or barred from enacting public health policies or may suffer financial penalties that deplete resources for public health programs.

Metrics

11 Record Views

Details

Logo image