… Public universities have limited legal authority to unilaterally declare their campuses sanctuaries in defiance of federal law. Further, it is not clear how such defiance might affect receipt of federal funding (e.g., Pell, GEAR-UP, and Perkins), or what the repercussions might be for state funding.” – Central Washington University President James Gaudino

Four words: “defiance of federal law,” jump out at the author of Almost DailyBrett.gaudinomatthis

President James L. Guadino (left) with former Marine General, incoming Secretary of Defense and former CWU grad James N. Mattis.

These words and others in CWU President Gaudino’s well-written December 1 letter on “University Campus Sanctuary Status” pose a series of questions for both the adherents and the opponents of having Central Washington University (CWU) march down the same “sanctuary” path taken by public universities in California, Oregon and elsewhere.

Some of the questions which immediately come to mind are whether sanctuary university supporters still have not come to terms with the simple fact that Donald Trump is the president-elect of the United States.

Employing the Dr. Elizabeth Kübler-Ross model of the Five Stages of Grief and Loss, many have reached acceptance mode. Some are still bargaining (e.g., asking this week for the Electoral College to invalidate Trump’s election). Some are angry (e.g., protesting on inaugural day) and some are still in the first stage, denial (e.g., campus sanctuaries).

Does anyone believe for a nanosecond that Trump is not serious about immigration reform including building a wall and safeguarding our borders? It would be surprising, if President Barack Obama’s 2012 executive order on Deferred Action on Childhood Arrivals (DACA) is not rescinded by Trump in the first days, if not the first hours of his administration.

If that is indeed the case, and there is no reason to think it is not, then why would Central Washington and other universities “unilaterally declare” their campuses to be sanctuaries in direct “defiance of federal law”?

University of California students yell at chancellor Nicholas Dirks protesting proposed tuition hikes before a regents meeting, Thursday, Nov. 17, 2016, in San Francisco, Calif. (Karl Mondon/Bay Area News Group)

University of California students yell at chancellor Nicholas Dirks protesting proposed tuition hikes before a regents meeting, Thursday, Nov. 17, 2016, in San Francisco, Calif. (Karl Mondon/Bay Area News Group)

And what are the repercussions of deliberately violating federal law? President Gaudino mentions the possible loss of federal funding for student Pell grants, GEAR-UP and Perkins subventions, not to mention impact on state funds to the university. How many hundreds of thousands of dollars, if not millions, is the university risking, if CWU’s opts to become a “sanctuary” university?

How many students will be financially impacted by the loss of this funding? How will this negative reaction for deliberately defying the law — when it is not necessary — impact these students? Will they have to drop out of school? Have we even asked the question? Do we know? Do we care?

How will a campus sanctuary declaration impact the ability of CWU’s Advancement team in raising funds from alumni and friends? Should we consider that some existing and potential donors, if not a majority, would roll their eyes and close their check books if the university takes this action?

One of the reasons for sanctuary universities cited by proponents addresses protecting undocumented students, even though a litany of campus safeguards is already listed by President Gaudino in his letter.kate-steinle

Let’s take a second and ask another question: Has anyone on these campuses heard of the late Kate Steinle of your author’s former home town of Pleasanton, California? Her family is presently suing the “Sanctuary” City/County of San Francisco for defying federal immigration law, resulting in the violent death of their daughter.

If a CWU student is hurt, raped or murdered as a result of direct defiance of federal law by a sanctuary university, what is that university’s civil and/or criminal liability?

All this discussion should bring us back to the main point of contention: The systematic defiance of federal law. Almost DailyBrett does not equate sanctuary universities with the civil disobedience of the Civil Rights Era. Instead it’s a deliberate effort to flaunt existing law, which augers a predictable question:

What’s next when it comes to laws that fall out of favor with the sanctuary crowd? If we can pick and choose which laws to follow, and which to defy, how long will it take for society to collapse?

Do we really want to know?

http://psychcentral.com/lib/the-5-stages-of-loss-and-grief/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/higher-education-is-awash-with-hysteria-that-might-have-helped-elect-trump/2016/11/18/a589b14e-ace6-11e6-977a-1030f822fc35_story.html?utm_term=.fac990b5941f

http://www.npr.org/2016/12/05/504467169/university-of-california-pledges-to-fight-trump-on-immigration-policy

http://www.oregonlive.com/education/index.ssf/2016/11/university_of_oregon_psu_stand.html

http://registerguard.com/rg/news/local/34999544-75/university-of-oregon-vows-to-provide-sanctuary-to-its-legal-limit.html.csp

http://www.mercurynews.com/2016/12/02/kate-steinle-lawsuit-federal-judge-probes-stolen-blm-gun-in-familys-suit-against-government/

Advertisements