DETROIT (Michigan News Source) – Cities and counties in Michigan have long sparred over whether they belong on the “sanctuary” naughty list published by the Center for Immigration Studies, which currently pegs Michigan at seven such jurisdictions. But the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) has their own list, comprised of 15 sanctuary spots in the state – and they’ve got the receipts to prove it.
In a recently released bombshell report called “Sanctuary Jurisdictions Across the U.S.,” FAIR is outing 1,003 sanctuary jurisdictions across the U.S. that are allegedly thumbing their noses at federal immigration law. In Michigan, FAIR’s got a list of 15 culprits containing cities and counties they claim are rolling out the welcome mat for illegal immigrants, even as President Trump’s ICE officers gear up for what he calls “the largest Mass Deportation Program in History.”
Michigan’s Sanctuary 15: The Lineup.
MORE NEWS: Call Off the Hunt: Judge Backs Coyote Season Cutback
FAIR’s May 2025 report names Ann Arbor, Battle Creek, Detroit, East Lansing, Ferndale, Grand Rapids, Hamtramck, Ingham County, Kalamazoo, Kalamazoo County, Kent County, Lansing, Muskegon County, Oakland County, and Washtenaw County as Michigan’s sanctuary scofflaws i.e. people or places that habitually ignore or flout immigration law.
Unlike the Center for Immigration Studies’ list – which fingers Kalamazoo County, Lansing, Leelanau County, Muskegon County, Oakland County, Washtenaw County, and Wayne County – FAIR’s roster is longer and more precise with explanations. FAIR’s team dug into city resolutions, police policies, and sheriff’s memos to expose their opposition to ICE cooperation.
Sanctuary jurisdictions “obstruct federal immigration agencies from enforcing federal immigration law,” FAIR policy analyst Hannah Davis told the Morning Wire podcast. “That can be seen in a plethora of ways, namely, not honoring ICE detainers or ensuring that ICE agents aren’t allowed into a jail system or courthouse, or instructing local law enforcement to not communicate with ICE agencies.” Michigan’s 15 are, according to FAIR, prime examples of this obstructionist playbook.
The receipts: how Michigan’s jurisdictions made the naughty list.
Let’s break down a few of FAIR’s juiciest findings:
- Ann Arbor: This liberal enclave’s 2003 and 2017 city council resolutions limit police-ICE cooperation to criminal matters, unless the police chief deems it a “public safety concern.” Status inquiries? Only allowed for serious crimes or to ID someone arrested for a 93-day-plus offense.
- Detroit: The Motor City’s 2019 sanctuary resolution and 2024 municipal code scream “welcoming city” which they declare is a term used interchangeably with “sanctuary” city. Police can’t ask about immigration status to enforce federal law, and ICE needs a “properly executed” detainer to get it honored. Detroit’s schools? Off-limits to ICE without a judicial warrant.
- Lansing: Mayor Virg Bernero’s 2017 executive order, still backed by current Mayor Andy Schor, bans status inquiries and detentions based solely on immigration status. The sheriff’s office won’t hold inmates for ICE without a judicial warrant, and the school district’s 2025 welcoming resolution keeps ICE at arm’s length unless they’ve got a “specific lawful federal criminal warrant.”
- Kalamazoo County: The sheriff’s office only honors arrest warrants from federal judges, not ICE detainers. Misdemeanor suspects are held for only two hours and felons are only held up to 12 hours the following day.
- Hamtramck: Police Chief Jamiel Altaheri told The Review in Hamtramck in January 2025, “The Hamtramck Police Department will not investigate or arrest people based on their immigration status.” Schools are “safe havens,” with a 2017 resolution promising to shield immigrant families from deportation.
FAIR’s report is a laundry list of similar policies across the 15 jurisdictions, from prohibiting status inquiries to demanding judicial warrants for detainers. FAIR argues these policies create a public safety and national security nightmare, forcing ICE into risky street raids instead of controlled jail transfers.
“If LA didn’t have sanctuary policies, immigration officials would be able to, in a controlled environment, go into the jail system,” Davis said, pointing to California’s chaos and a possible harbinger of Michigan’s future.
Sanctuary cities in the crosshairs of the Trump Administration.
Enter President Trump, who’s not exactly sending the country’s sanctuary mayors a fruit basket. In a fiery statement on Truth Social, he declared, “ICE Officers are herewith ordered… to do all in their power to achieve the very important goal of delivering the single largest Mass Deportation Program in History.”
The president has got his sights set on “crime ridden and deadly Inner Cities” like Detroit, where he claims “Radical Left Democrats” use sanctuary policies to “cheat in Elections, and grow the Welfare State, robbing good paying Jobs and Benefits from Hardworking American Citizens.” His solution? Unleash ICE, Border Patrol, and even the Pentagon to “reverse the tide of Mass Destruction Migration.”
That puts Michigan’s “Sanctuary 15” squarely in Trump’s crosshairs, especially since FAIR’s report suggests that cities like Detroit are incentivizing illegal immigration. “They have a higher population, and with a higher population comes higher crime,” Davis noted, citing trends in sanctuary-heavy states. While she stopped short of a direct correlation, the implication is clear: many of Michigan’s policies are a magnet for trouble.
The reality of Michigan’s defiant dance.
Here’s the kicker: Michigan’s sanctuary jurisdictions aren’t just defying Trump – they’re trampling over federal law, according to FAIR. The Supremacy Clause (Article VI) and federal statutes like 8 U.S.C. § 1373 make it clear that states can’t block ICE from getting immigration info. Yet, Ann Arbor’s city council and Kalamazoo’s sheriff are playing gatekeeper, demanding judicial warrants ICE isn’t required to produce.
The pushback: can Michigan’s sanctuary rebels hold out?
FAIR’s not just naming and shaming – they’re calling for a crackdown. Davis praised Indiana’s Attorney General for suing sanctuary cities into compliance. Maybe Michigan’s Governor Whitmer could take notes. Davis urged, “We need states to use our report to track these jurisdictions and to go after them, to enact anti, sanctuary policy at the statewide level, to actually put enforcement mechanisms in their policies, to put teeth in them.”
Trump’s threat to withhold federal funding could also turn the screws, though Davis admitted it’s no slam dunk. “The powers in the purse,” she said, but Michigan’s sanctuary stalwarts might not budge.
