Sanctuary Cities in 2025: Where Does Texas Stand?

Sanctuary cities have been at the center of heated debates regarding immigration policy in the United States. Supporters argue they help foster trust between immigrant communities and law enforcement, while critics claim they obstruct federal immigration enforcement. Over the years, the legal and political landscape around sanctuary cities has evolved, leading to a significant decline in their numbers. 

In this article, we will examine the current status of sanctuary cities in Texas, define their purpose, discuss the communities they protect, and explore the reasons for their decreasing presence across the country. 

Big city big problems.

Are There Any Sanctuary Cities Left in Texas in 2025? 

As of 2025, there are no officially recognized sanctuary cities in Texas. This is primarily due to Senate Bill 4 (SB4), a state law passed in 2017 that effectively banned sanctuary policies throughout the state. SB4 prohibits local governments from adopting policies that limit cooperation with federal immigration authorities. It also grants law enforcement officers the authority to ask about a person’s immigration status during routine encounters, such as traffic stops or arrests. 

The law imposes strict penalties for non-compliance, including: 

- Fines for jurisdictions that refuse to comply with federal immigration detainers. 

- Removal from office for officials who implement sanctuary policies. 

- Potential criminal charges for law enforcement officers who fail to enforce immigration laws. 

Since SB4 took effect, local governments in Texas have avoided adopting sanctuary policies out of fear of legal and financial consequences. Even cities that were previously considered sanctuary jurisdictions, such as Austin and Dallas, have fully complied with the law, ensuring there are no sanctuary cities remaining in Texas. 

What Is a Sanctuary City? 

A sanctuary city is a jurisdiction that implements policies limiting local law enforcement’s cooperation with federal immigration authorities, particularly U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). These policies can include: 

- Restricting local police from inquiring about a person's immigration status. 

- Declining ICE detainer requests unless there is a judicial warrant. 

- Prohibiting the use of local resources to enforce federal immigration laws. 

Contrary to some misconceptions, sanctuary cities do not provide full immunity from deportation for undocumented immigrants. Instead, they focus on ensuring that local law enforcement does not actively participate in federal immigration enforcement unless legally required to do so. 

While some jurisdictions explicitly declare themselves as sanctuary cities through city council resolutions or laws, others implement sanctuary policies without officially labeling themselves as such. This has led to varying interpretations of what qualifies as a sanctuary city. 

Who Do Sanctuary Cities Protect? 

Sanctuary cities primarily aim to protect undocumented immigrants by limiting the extent to which local law enforcement cooperates with ICE. These policies are designed to: 

1. Enhance Public Safety 

   - Supporters argue that sanctuary policies encourage undocumented immigrants to report crimes, cooperate with investigations, and seek legal assistance without the fear of deportation. 

   - Studies suggest that immigrant communities in sanctuary cities report lower crime rates due to improved trust between residents and law enforcement. 

2. Preserve Local Resources 

   - Immigration enforcement is a federal responsibility. Sanctuary cities allow local police departments to focus on crime prevention rather than using their limited resources to detain individuals for federal immigration violations. 

3. Promote Civil Liberties 

   - Some jurisdictions view sanctuary policies as a protection of civil rights, preventing racial profiling and ensuring that people are not detained without probable cause. 

However, critics argue that sanctuary policies create loopholes that allow some individuals with criminal records to remain in the country despite federal deportation orders. 

Why Have There Been Fewer Sanctuary Cities in the United States? 

The number of sanctuary cities in the United States has decreased in recent years due to a combination of legislation, legal challenges, political pressure, and public opinion shifts. Here’s why: 

1. State and Federal Laws Restricting Sanctuary Policies 

Several states, including Texas, Florida, Georgia, and Arizona, have passed laws banning sanctuary cities and requiring local law enforcement to cooperate with ICE. Texas’s SB4, Florida’s SB168, and Georgia’s HB87 are examples of laws that punish local governments for refusing to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement. 

Additionally, at the federal level, attempts have been made to cut funding to sanctuary cities. Although some efforts have faced legal challenges, they have contributed to the decline in sanctuary policies. 

2. Legal Challenges and Supreme Court Rulings 

Several legal battles have shaped the future of sanctuary policies. In recent years: 

- Federal courts have ruled that local governments cannot be forced to enforce federal immigration laws. However, these rulings have not stopped states from passing anti-sanctuary laws. 

- In some cases, cities have faced lawsuits from victims of crimes committed by undocumented immigrants, leading to public pressure to repeal sanctuary policies. 

3. Political and Public Pressure 

Immigration remains a highly divisive political issue, and public opinion on sanctuary cities varies based on demographic and ideological lines. While some cities continue to defend their sanctuary policies, others have repealed them due to: 

- State government pressure (e.g., Texas forcing compliance through SB4). 

- Public backlash after high-profile cases involving undocumented immigrants. 

- Changes in local leadership as new city officials reverse prior sanctuary policies. 

4. Increased ICE Enforcement 

During recent administrations, ICE has intensified efforts to track, detain, and deport undocumented immigrants, reducing the effectiveness of sanctuary policies. Even in jurisdictions that still limit cooperation, ICE agents have adapted their strategies, leading to more workplace and home raids. 

5. Crime and Public Safety Concerns 

Some sanctuary policies have faced criticism due to cases where undocumented immigrants committed violent crimes after being released from local custody despite ICE detainers. These incidents have led to public and political demands to end sanctuary policies in certain cities. 

For example, in San Francisco, the 2015 case of Kate Steinle, who was fatally shot by an undocumented immigrant with multiple prior deportations, became a flashpoint in the debate over sanctuary cities. Such cases have played a role in the nationwide reduction of sanctuary jurisdictions. 

Conclusion 

The landscape of sanctuary cities has changed dramatically over the past decade. In Texas, there are no longer any sanctuary cities due to strict state laws like SB4. Nationally, the number of sanctuary cities has declined due to legal restrictions, political shifts, and concerns over crime and public safety. 

However, the debate over sanctuary policies is far from over. As immigration remains a key issue in American politics, the future of sanctuary cities will likely continue to evolve, shaped by legislative changes, court rulings, and public opinion. 

Understanding the purpose, impact, and controversies surrounding sanctuary cities is essential for anyone engaged in discussions about immigration policy. Whether these policies make communities safer or hinder law enforcement’s ability to enforce immigration laws is a topic that will remain highly contested in the years to come.