Deliberation Summary/Reflection

On Saturday, February 25, I attended a Deliberation entitled, “To Be or Not to Be: A Sanctuary City”.

The deliberation team conducted their deliberation on the pressing issue of illegal immigration and sanctuary cities. I felt the team provided a comprehensive overview of the topic, and effectively connected it to the Penn State community by highlighting the potential for Penn State to become a “Sanctuary Campus”.

We began the discussion by talking about the email sent by President Barron to the student body, declaring that illegal immigrants attending Penn State would still be considered students in the Penn State community, despite the negative sentiments put forth towards illegal immigrants by our current president, Donald Trump.

The team’s first approach was to address the legal aspects of sanctuary cities with respect to the past, current, and proposed future immigration policies. We all were encouraged to share thoughts the extent to which we believed federal laws could be nullified by the individual states and overruled, allowing the states to decide the particular issue of illegal immigrants themselves. There was a comprehensive discussion as to the positives and detriments to this policy. The positives, ensuring that people were able to be educated free of fear from potential deportation, seemed to be balanced by the detriments, the potential destructive effects that federal de-funding would impose on public universities such as Penn State.

Then the discussion progressed to the existence of safe spaces on college campuses, Penn State in particular. We identified potential positive and negative outcomes due to the existence of these safe spaces or lack thereof. There was a general consensus within the group that although they would be beneficial to the students, Penn State should refrain from instituting a legitimate place designated as a “safe space”.

The final way the team approached this topic was through the idea of creating an education program at Penn State. This program would include important resources for illegal immigrants, such as their rights, as well as the rights of regular Penn State students. It was not yet fully established whether this education program would be mandatory or in what form it would be administered.

I feel the deliberation was conducted very well, as I remained interested and attentive throughout the duration of the event. The way the information was presented added greatly to my current knowledge of immigration policy and offered a wide variety of opinions that were mutually respected by all in the room. My eyes were opened to just how many people are affected, directly or indirectly, by this issue in the United States.

Leave a Reply

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