Guest Blog: The Politics of Sanctuary by Laura Madokoro

Sanctuary in Pieces documents the evolving nature of sanctuary in settler societies. Drawing on archival research and interviews in Montreal/Mooniyaang/Tiohtià:ke, Laura Madokoro explores the history of protection and hospitality over two centuries and the shifting political terrain upon which sanctuary has been sought and, on occasion, received.

In her guest blog below, Madokoro introduces us to the concept of sanctuary cities and her book.

The Politics of Sanctuary

The notion of sanctuary is in some ways an ancient one, dating to shrines and legal systems in Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome. There are also references to sanctuary in the Old Testament, such as the idea of creating six Cities of Refuge in Kedesh, Shechem, Hebron, Bezer, Ramoth, and Golan.

In other ways, the notion of sanctuary is very modern, a product of conflicts over the moral authority of the state and organized religion. This modern sanctuary movement dates to the 1970s in the United States although it draws on historic traditions, referencing sanctuary laws in Medieval England, that are now held as customary law in many parts of Europe, North America, and South America. The main difference is that ancient and medieval sanctuary traditions offered sanctuary to criminals whereas modern sanctuary movements insist on the innocence, worthiness, and deservedness of those who are sheltered.

Since the late twentieth century, sanctuary has been evoked in two key ways. The first is for migrants and refugees who are navigating their way through complicated immigration and asylum determination procedures, sometimes without legal status, or contesting deportations. The second is in terms of refuge for war resisters, most notably in the context of the US war in Vietnam and again in the context of the war in Iraq in 1990–1991. There are many other forms of refuge, most notably shelter for people who are homeless or unhoused, or escaping domestic violence, but the language of sanctuary has generally been invoked only in the context of migrant justice or anti-war efforts.

The Sanctuary Movement that emerged in the 1980s across North America was largely concerned with the plight of refugees and migrants from “the dirty wars” in Honduras, Nicaragua, El Salvador, and Guatemala who confronted hostile immigration and asylum regimes in Reagan’s America. Refugees were protected in churches and their cases were publicized to raise awareness about the harm that US foreign policy was wreaking and the merits of individual cases. Religious leaders and congregations used the moral authority of the church, and the idea of a church as a sacred space, to insist that migrants and refugees in their care were worthy and deserving of protection. In turn, this movement informed in part efforts described as a New Sanctuary Movement. This movement emerged in the early 2000s and consisted of sanctuary cities (a phenomenon that had emerged in the mid-1980s) and activist campaigns for broad-based immigration reform.

Sanctuary cities are jurisdictions that declare themselves safe or inclusive for people living without official legal status. The core idea of a Sanctuary City is to ensure that all residents can access health care, education, and other municipal services without fear of being apprehended for their lack of immigration status. The form and structure of sanctuary city policies vary across jurisdictions, particularly around the extent to which local law enforcement cooperates with federal immigration and enforcement authorities, but the general premise is one of inclusivity and access.

The number of sanctuary cities in the United States grew considerably during the first Trump administration. Efforts to protect undocumented migrants and others without legal status drew the ire of the administration, which threatened federal funding to sanctuary jurisdictions. This hostility persists. One of President Trump’s first acts upon returning to office in 2025 was an executive order that erased the Biden administration’s “protected areas policy” which made sites such as schools and hospitals off-limits for Immigration Control and Enforcement (ICE) activities. In the early days of the his second administration, Trump and his supporters have demonstrated an equal if not greater determination to eliminate sanctuary cities and undermine much of the social justice work on behalf of migrants and refugees.

Sanctuary in Pieces: Two Hundred Years of Flight, Fugitivity, and Resistance in a North American City was written in the shadow of the city of Montreal’s unanimous council decision to declare itself a sanctuary city in 2017 and its quick decision to reverse course in 2019. This largely performative, and easily reversible decision, invited questions about the nature of sanctuary in the city. What did the substance of sanctuary consist of? Who was involved? And how have ideas and acts of sanctuary changed over time?

The result is an examination of six case studies beginning with the history of fugitive slaves from the United States who moved to Montreal (known as Mooniyang in Anishnabemowin and Tiohtià:ke in Kanien’kéha) as the British Empire moved to eliminate the last vestiges of slavery from its realm. Focusing on the ways refuge and sanctuary were forged beyond the state, Sanctuary in Pieces then considers the role of various religious and secular actors in offering protection to a range of individuals including wanted criminals, transnational anarchist intellectuals, and war resisters. It concludes with a focused analysis of the public forms of sanctuary that have both characterized and distinguished individual acts of solidarity and protection in the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries. In tracing the history of sanctuary over the course of two hundred years, Sanctuary in Pieces distills several key facets of the contemporary sanctuary movement. The first is the move from refuge and protection that is underground, hidden, and deeply challenging of the authority of the state to more public and performative sanctuary that seeks to provide protection to individuals while at the same time advocating for broader-based immigration reforms. The second is the importance of understanding sanctuary practices as multiple and multi-faceted and how notions of welcome, hospitality, and protection have never been the sole purview of the state, nor should they be in the present.

The discourse around migration that has evolved over the past few decades is increasingly politicized and designed to foster and fuel divisions. This often takes place on the backs of people already rendered vulnerable by economic, climate, and political precarity. Paradoxically, as sanctuary itself becomes the target of harsh rhetoric and punitive practices, the need for broad-based welcome, hospitality, and refuge becomes all the more critical and urgent.

Laura Madokoro is a historian who lives and works on the traditional territory of the Algonquin Anishnaabeg.