Michigan’s last ‘sanctuary’ standing? Why East Lansing is a Trump immigration target

East Lansing is the only Michigan city left on the DOJ’s ‘sanctuary’ jurisdiction list for immigration enforcement
Trump administration is threatening legal action or funding loss
City leaders haven’t moved to change the policy, say they’re in compliance with federal law

EAST LANSING — Officials in Michigan’s last federally designated “sanctuary city” aren’t backing down from their immigrant-friendly approach. But they are disputing the Trump administration’s claims that the city impedes law enforcement and puts “American citizens at risk by design.”

That’s “completely false,” East Lansing City Council member Mark Meadows said earlier this month in a public hearing, calling the federal designation an “honor.”

The suburban college town is among the 18 cities, 13 states and four counties US Attorney General Pam Bondi has threatened with legal action if they don’t change their local immigration policies.

In a resolution adopted two years ago, East Lansing declared that local police “shall not actively collaborate with federal agents solely for the purpose of enforcing federal immigration law” or use city resources to detain people “based solely upon a civil violation of federal immigration law.”

That’s made the city a target for conservatives at both the federal and state level as the Trump administration increases deportation efforts nationwide.

President Donald Trump has suggested withholding all federal funding from communities with sanctuary policies, though a San Francisco federal judge recently blocked that threat.

On Thursday, administration border czar Tom Homan told reporters that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) would “ramp up” activity in Chicago and other Democratic-led cities with sanctuary policies after Labor Day.

The Republican-led Michigan House in May passed legislation aimed at banning local governments from enacting sanctuary declarations, including one bill that would bar cities or counties with sanctuary policies from getting their share of state tax revenue.

East Lansing officials aren’t currently considering changes to the city’s 2023 resolution, which includes exceptions for individuals who have also been charged or convicted of serious crimes. But the policy is misunderstood, according to Meadows, a Democratic attorney and a fixture in East Lansing politics.

City officials have never claimed local law enforcement wouldn’t cooperate with federal officials where required — just that they aren’t going out of their way to volunteer services solely for immigration enforcement, he told Bridge Michigan.

“We’re probably wrongly on the list,” Meadows said in an interview. “We’re probably on the list because we call ourselves a sanctuary city, but the actual implementation of that, I think, does not violate any kind of federal activity or federal law.”

In an inaugural list published in May, the Trump administration first identified six Michigan counties and two cities it considered sanctuary communities that were “defying federal immigration law.”

RELATED STORIES:

In several areas, local officials challenged the designations, including in Wexford County, which Republican state Sen. Michele Hoitenga of Manton had argued was wrongly placed on the list — an “extremely disturbing” development.

The US Department of Justice published a revised list in August that included only one Michigan community: East Lansing.

“Sanctuary policies like those in East Lansing … protect illegal aliens and endanger American lives,” a senior Department of Homeland Security official said in a statement provided to Bridge.

“President Trump and Secretary (Kristi) Noem stand with the victims of illegal alien crime while sanctuary politicians stand with criminal illegal aliens.”

The federal government recently filed a lawsuit against New York City over its sanctuary policy, and the city of Louisville recently changed its practices to avoid loss of federal funding.

While there’s no set legal definition of what constitutes a “sanctuary city,” immigration advocates told Bridge that municipalities in Michigan and across the country have adopted immigrant-friendly policies to build community trust and preserve separation of powers and duties between state and local governments.

“Communities like East Lansing should be proud of the lawful steps they have taken to uphold the rights of our immigrant (neighbors) and we encourage other Michigan communities to do the same,” said Christine Sauvé, manager of policy and communication for the Michigan Immigrant Rights Center.

From ‘safe haven’ to ‘sanctuary’

Home to Michigan State University, East Lansing is a suburban city in Ingham County where voters trend reliably Democratic — precinct-level voting data shows 78% of residents there picked former Democratic nominee Kamala Harris over Trump in the 2024 cycle.

About 10.8% of the city’s population of roughly 47,700 people is foreign-born, according to US Census data. That’s slightly higher than the statewide average of 7.3%, but far from communities like Hamtramck, Troy, Dearborn, Novi and Sterling Heights, where foreign-born residents make up between 25-44% of the population.

Meadows, the East Lansing city council member, said the city’s “sanctuary” roots can be traced back to 2001, when the city attempted to protect its Muslim population from unwarranted FBI scrutiny in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks in New York City.

US Attorney General Pam Bondi, left, has threatened local governments with legal action if they don’t change their local immigration policies. President Donald Trump has also called for cutting federal funding to those communities, though those efforts have so far been blocked in court. (Evan Vucci/Associated Press)

Later, in 2017, East Lansing officials codified “safe haven” language spelling out city policy when dealing with immigration enforcement issues, stopping short of using the “sanctuary” terminology.

The 2023 resolution declaring East Lansing a sanctuary city states law enforcement officers “shall not actively collaborate with federal agents solely for the purpose of enforcing federal immigration law” or use city resources to detain people “based solely upon a civil violation of federal immigration law.”

Proponents of the resolution said at the time that a “sanctuary” declaration would more clearly define the city’s stance and any protections available to people without legal immigration status, as well as make foreign-born residents more comfortable contacting local authorities.

Council member Dana Watson, in 2023 comments supporting the policy, said de-emphasizing a person’s civil immigration status in police work could relieve a “chronic stress for individuals when they are living with looking over their shoulders, wondering if this or that is going to happen.”

But council member George Brookover was concerned the change would do little besides make the town a political target.

“I think sometimes, doing nothing is smarter, politically, than doing something,” Brookover — a Democrat who is now East Lansing’s mayor — said at the time, explaining his lone no vote on a council resolution declaring the city a “sanctuary” for immigrants. “I don’t see any need…to put a label on us, on this.”

Student groups affiliated with Michigan State University advocated for the change, including the student government body Associated Students of Michigan State University.

The university has never taken a formal stance on East Lansing’s decision, spokesperson Amber McCann told Bridge.

She said the university’s main focus in recent months has been on assisting individual students navigating immigration or visa issues, including the 12 MSU students who were marked for deportation before federal officials reversed terminations of their legal status.

MSU has not received any direct communication from federal authorities regarding East Lansing’s sanctuary status, and nothing “dissimilar to any other guidance or information that is being communicated universally to institutions of higher ed that accept international students,” McCann said.

East Lansing city spokesperson Carrie Sampson declined to comment on the sanctuary designation this week, including whether city officials have been in ongoing communication with federal agencies or if the 2023 resolution would be revisited.

Brookover, the city mayor, did not respond to Bridge Michigan requests for comment on the matter. Mayor Pro Tem Kerry Ebersole Singh also declined to comment, citing the possibility of pending litigation and ongoing “discourse” with the Department of Justice.

Meadows said the only communication the council has received from the Trump administration so far is a letter from the attorney general notifying communities of the agency’s stance on sanctuary policies.

East Lansing being the only city on the DOJ’s list “took me a little bit by surprise,” Meadows said, in part because he’s not aware of any time the city has been asked to participate with the federal government in an immigration enforcement action.

What other communities do

Some Michigan law enforcement agencies are taking a decidedly different approach than East Lansing by signing what’s known as 287(g) agreements with ICE to conduct limited immigration enforcement measures.

County sheriffs in Berrien, Calhoun, Jackson and Roscommon counties, as well as the Metro Police Authority of Genesee County and the Taylor Police Department, have entered agreements with ICE, federal documents show.

How those local agencies will cooperate with ICE appears somewhat academic at this point: Monthly federal records have not documented any 287(g)-affiliated agency encounters in Michigan this year.

In East Lansing, Council member Mark Meadows has called Trump administration claims that the city’s sanctuary policy impedes immigration enforcement “completely false.” (Lauren Gibbons/Bridge Michigan)

Matt Bade, police chief of the Genesee County authority, told reporters last month that the department’s intention is “only to enforce criminal laws” and would not involve participating in ICE raids.

East Lansing isn’t the only local government in Michigan with immigrant-friendly policies on the books. The initial list circulated by the Department of Homeland Security in May also designated the city of Ann Arbor and six Michigan counties as “sanctuary” jurisdictions. That list was later taken down amid criticism from law enforcement agencies.

In a June 2 statement, Kent County Sheriff Michelle LaJoye-Young disputed the county’s initial inclusion on federal sanctuary lists.

“We want to be clear: Kent County is not — and has never been — a sanctuary county,” LaJoye-Young said. “We are working with federal officials to better understand how this error occurred and to ensure the public record accurately reflects Kent County’s policies and practices.”

One common path municipalities have taken is designating their community as “welcoming” to immigrants. At least 22 cities and counties in Michigan, including Detroit, Grand Rapids, Ann Arbor, Kalamazoo and Lansing, have passed welcoming resolutions, according to the group Global Detroit.

Lansing was briefly designated a sanctuary city in 2017, but council members voted to rescind the resolution a week later. Advocacy groups in Grand Rapids have called on city officials to pursue sanctuary policies limiting local police involvement in federal immigration arrests, though the city has not done so.

Local officials in many of these communities have publicly stated their willingness to cooperate with ICE should the need come up.

Kalamazoo Mayor David Anderson previously told Bridge Michigan the city’s police department doesn’t ask about immigration status unless an arrest is made, noting that at that point, “if it becomes evident that a person is here illegally, that’s information we would communicate to others.”

‘Nobody wants to be a sanctuary city right now’

State Rep. Cam Cavitt, a Cheboygan Republican sponsoring legislation banning local sanctuary policies, said he’s aware his House-passed bill likely won’t get a hearing in the Democratic-majority Senate, or make his way to Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer’s desk.

But he said he’s encouraged by the Trump administration’s efforts to compel local governments to move away from sanctuary or welcoming designations.

While he acknowledged potential liability issues for law enforcement detaining someone on behalf of ICE for extended periods of time, Cavitt said local policies specifically limiting federal immigration enforcement interaction could now result in lost funding, costly legal battles and other consequences.

“No one wants to label themselves a sanctuary city anymore…it’s kind of a toxic term,” he said. “Nobody wants to be a sanctuary city right now.”

No so-called sanctuary jurisdictions have thus far been found in violation of federal law, and whether or not a community actually is a sanctuary comes down to definition and what’s done in practice, said Sauvé of the Michigan Immigrant Rights Center.

But the discourse around sanctuary cities and local immigration law “can have negative, real-life consequences on immigrant communities,” Sauvé said, from disproportionate enforcement in communities perceived to be friendly to immigrants to increased contact with ICE in “situations that don’t call for it,” like local traffic stops.

Meadows, the East Lansing city council member, said the city is prepared for whatever legal action may come its way. During the last City Council meeting, he told the public that “we should expect something to come our way, and we will defend it at that point in time.”

“I think anybody who takes a look at our definition of sanctuary cities would realize that we are not saying we will not participate in mandatory federal activity, but we’re not going to volunteer,” he told Bridge.