Welcoming the stranger in Trump’s America: Notes on the everyday processes of constructing and enduring sanctuary | Intellect Skip to content
1981
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Hospitality & Society
  4. Volume 12, Issue 2
  5. Article
Geographies of Welcome: Engagements with “Ordinary” Hospitality
  • ISSN: 2042-7913
  • E-ISSN: 2042-7921

Abstract

Geographers have begun to explore the concept of ‘immigrant welcome’ as a framework for understanding the tension between spontaneous social support for immigrants and refugees and their subsequent restriction and criminalization by states. Overlooked in the emerging discourse on immigrant welcome is the rich literature in feminist geography that views the everyday practices of endurance, care and social reproduction as essential to, but often hidden within, more traditional, political and economic analyses of power. By focusing on the everyday practices of welcome within sanctuary church activism, I argue for more attention to the energy-intense work that is often excluded from official media and academic accounts, yet which is essential to understanding what makes welcome function or fail. I draw upon one in-depth case study of a sanctuary church in Ohio, where a woman has been living for a year and a half in public defiance of her deportation order. In addition to contextualizing this specific case within the broader policy and immigrant rights landscape, I focus on the spatial, material and relational processes that participants implemented to construct a ‘welcoming’ environment as well as observe the ways in which welcome fails to live up to its imagined potential. The case study provides important grounded insights into the material, relational and emotional processes of enduring sanctuary as a form of resistance to the US deportation regime and enduring sanctuary itself as an intensive socio-spatial form of existence.

© 2022 Intellect Ltd
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1386/hosp_00050_1
2022-06-01
2024-04-19
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. American Immigration Lawyers Association ( 2018), Cogs in the Deportation Machine: How Policy Changes by the Trump Administration Have Touched Every Major Area of Enforcement, Washington DC:: AILA;, 24 April, https://www.aila.org/infonet/aila-report-cogs-in-the-deportation-machine. Accessed 1 December 2021.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Armenta, A.. ( 2012;), ‘ From sheriff’s deputies to immigration officers: Screening immigrant status in a Tennessee jail. ’, Law and Policy, 34:2, pp. 191–210.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Begaj, P.. ( 2008;), ‘ An analysis of historical and legal sanctuary and a cohesive approach to the current movement. ’, John Marshall Law Review, 42:1, pp. 135–164, https://repository.law.uic.edu/lawreview/vol42/iss1/5/. Accessed 1 December 2021.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Ben-Nun, G.. ( 2021;), ‘ Jewish law, Roman law, and the accordance of hospitality to refugees and climate-change migrants. ’, Migration and Society, 4:1, pp. 124–36.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Buff, R. I.. ( 2019;), ‘ Sanctuary everywhere. ’, Radical History Review, 2019:135, pp. 14–42.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Butler, J.. ( 2005), Giving an Account of Oneself, New York:: Fordham University Press;.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Campbell, K.. ( 2017;), ‘ Operation sojourner: The government infiltration of the sanctuary movement in the 1980s and its legacy on the modern central American refugee crisis. ’, University of St. Thomas Law Journal, 13:3, pp. 474–507.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Coleman, M.. ( 2007;), ‘ A geopolitics of engagement: Neoliberalism, the war on terrorism, and the reconfiguration of US immigration enforcement. ’, Geopolitics, 12:4, pp. 607–34.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Coleman, M., and Kocher, A.. ( 2011;), ‘ Detention, deportation, devolution and immigrant incapacitation in the U.S., post 9/11. ’, Geographical Journal, 177:3, pp. 228–37.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Conlon, D., and Hiemstra, N.. ( 2014;), ‘ Examining the everyday micro-economies of migrant detention in the United States. ’, Geographica Helvetica, 69:5, pp. 335–44.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Coutin, S.. ( 1993), The Culture of Protest: Religious Activism and the U.S. Sanctuary Movement, Boulder, CO:: Westview Press;.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Coutin, S.. ( 1995;), ‘ Smugglers or samaritans in Tuscon, Arizona: Producing and contesting legal truth. ’, American Ethnologist, 22:3, pp. 549–71.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. De Genova, N.. ( 2002;), ‘ Migrant “illegality” and deportability in everyday life. ’, Annual Review of Anthropology, 31:1, pp. 419–47.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Dias, E.. ( 2019;), ‘ Ordered deported, then sent a $497,777 fine from ICE. ’, New York Times, 4 July, https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/04/us/migrants-deportation-fines.html. Accessed 1 December 2021.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Earls, A.. ( 2020;), ‘ Half of US churches now enlist armed security. ’, Christianity Today, 28 January, https://www.christianitytoday.com/news/2020/january/half-of-us-churches-now-enlist-armed-security.html. Accessed 1 December 2021.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Ehrkamp, P., and Nagel, C.. ( 2014;), ‘ “Under the radar”: Undocumented immigrants, Christian faith communities, and the precarious spaces of welcome in the U.S. south. ’, Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 104:2, pp. 319–28.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Ehrkamp, P., and Nagel, C.. ( 2017;), ‘ Policing the borders of church and societal membership: Immigration and faith-based communities in the US south. ’, Territory, Politics, Governance, 5:3, pp. 318–31.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Freeland, G.. ( 2010;), ‘ Negotiating place, space and borders: The new sanctuary movement. ’, Latino Studies, 8:4, pp. 485–508.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Gill, N.. ( 2018;), ‘ The suppression of welcome. ’, Fennia, 196:1, pp. 88–98.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Giroux, H.. ( 2017;), ‘ White nationalism, armed culture and state violence in the age of Donald Trump. ’, Philosophy and Social Criticism, 43:9, pp. 887–910.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Golash-Boza, T.. ( 2012), Due Process Denied: Detentions and Deportations in the United States, New York:: Routledge;.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Golash-Boza, T.. ( 2015), Deported: Immigrant Policing, Disposable Labor and Global Capitalism, New York:: NYU Press;.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Harrison, J. L., and Lloyd, S. E.. ( 2011;), ‘ Illegality at work: Deportability and the productive new era of immigration enforcement. ’, Antipode, 44:2, pp. 365–85.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Hart, T.. ( 2017;), ‘ To avoid deportation, woman takes sanctuary in Columbus church. ’, NBC4i, https://www.nbc4i.com/news/to-avoid-deportation-woman-takes-sanctuary-in-columbus-church/. Accessed 1 December 2021.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Hatuqa, D.. ( 2018;), ‘ A year in “sanctuary”: The Ohio mother living in a church to defy deportation. ’, The Guardian, 28 September, https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/sep/28/edith-espinal-columbus-mennonite-church-ohio-immigration-sanctuary. Accessed 1 December 2021.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Hiemstra, N.. ( 2010;), ‘ Immigrant “illegality” as neoliberal governmentality in Leadville, Colorado. ’, Antipode, 42:1, pp. 74–102.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Hing, B. O.. ( 2018), American Presidents, Deportations, and Human Rights Violations: From Carter to Trump, Cambridge:: Cambridge University Press;.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Houston, S., and Morse, C.. ( 2017;), ‘ The ordinary and extraordinary: Producing migrant inclusion and exclusion in US sanctuary movements. ’, Studies in Social Justice, 11:1, pp. 27–47.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Inda, J. X.. ( 2008), Targeting Immigrants: Government, Technology, and Ethics, Malden, MA:: John Wiley & Sons;.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Jones, R.. ( 2016), Violent Borders: Refugees and the Right to Move, London:: Verso;.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. King, D.. ( 2021;), ‘ Edith Espinal allowed to leave church sanctuary, must check in with ICE periodically. ’, The Columbus Dispatch, 18 February, https://www.dispatch.com/story/news/2021/02/18/edith-espinal-leaves-sanctuary-ask-ice-let-her-stay/6788133002/?fbclid=IwAR2wE4oyjzOqZFTbcNfW2-kR9rStRJFNGRRNHr6w_vGGDx0UuUVvzoRefog. Accessed 1 December 2021.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Kocher, A.. ( 2017;), ‘ The new resistance: Immigrant rights organizing in an era of Trump. ’, Journal of Latin American Geography, 16:2, pp. 165–71.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Kocher, A.. ( 2018;), ‘ Immigration courts, judicial acceleration, and the intensification of immigration enforcement in the first year of the Trump administration. ’, in J. Kowalski. (ed.), Reading Trump: A Parallax View on the US Presidency, Cham:: Palgrave;.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Lévinas, E.. ( 1978), Existence and Existents, Pittsburgh, PA:: Duquesne University Press;.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Loken, G., and Bambino, L.. ( 1993;), ‘ Harboring, sanctuary and the crime of charity under federal immigration law. ’, Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review, 28:1, pp. 119–84.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Martin, L.. ( 2012;), ‘ Governing through the family: Struggles over US noncitizen family detention policy. ’, Environment and Planning A, 44:4, pp. 866–88.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Medeiros, J., and Steger, P.. ( 2018;), ‘ Sanctuary and harboring in Trump’s America. ’, Mitchell Hamline Law Review, 44:3, pp. 869–906.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Miller, J.. ( 2017a;), ‘ Merciful strength | Sanctuary I | October 1. ’, Columbus Mennonite Church, https://www.columbusmennonite.org/sermons/merciful-strength-sanctuary-i-october-1. Accessed 1 December 2021.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Miller, J.. ( 2017b;), ‘ Sanctuary so far…. ’, Columbus Mennonite Church, https://www.columbusmennonite.org/blog/sanctuary-so-far…. Accessed 1 December 2021.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Murray, M. J.. ( 2018;), ‘ Connective networks and the new sanctuary movement: Solidarity with Edith Espinal. ’, master’s thesis, Columbus, OH:: The Ohio State University;.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Nagel, C., and Ehrkamp, P.. ( 2016;), ‘ Deserving welcome? Immigrants, Christian faith communities, and the contentious politics of belonging in the US South. ’, Antipode, 48:4, pp. 1040–58.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Nessel, L.. ( 2017;), ‘ Instilling fear and regulating behavior: Immigration law as social control. ’, Georgetown Immigration Law Journal, 31:3, pp. 525–60.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Nguyen, N.. ( 2016), A Curriculum of Fear: Homeland Security in U.S. Public Schools, Minneapolis, MN:: University of Minnesota Press;.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Orozco, M., and Andersen, N.. ( 2018;), Sanctuary in the Age of Trump: The Rise of the Movement a Year Into the Trump Administration. , National Sanctuary Movement, https://www.sanctuarynotdeportation.org/uploads/7/6/9/1/76912017/sanctuary_in_the_age_of_trump_january_2018.pdf. Accessed 1 December 2021.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Paik, N.. ( 2017;), ‘ Abolitionist futures and the US sanctuary movement. ’, Race and Class, 59:2, pp. 3–25, https://doi.org/10.1177/0306396817717858. Accessed 1 December 2021.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Paik, N.,, Ruiz, J., and Schreiber, R.. ( 2019;), ‘ Sanctuary’s radical networks. ’, Radical History Review, 2019:135, pp. 1–13, https://doi.org/10.1215/01636545-7607797. Accessed 1 December 2021.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Pérez Huber, L.. ( 2017;), ‘ “Make America great again!”: Donald Trump, racist nativism and the virulent adherence to white supremacy amid U.S. demographic change. ’, Charleston Law Review, 10, pp. 215–48.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Perla, H., and Coutin, S.. ( 2009;), ‘ Legacies and origins of the 1980s US–central American sanctuary movement. ’, Refuge, 26:1, pp. 7–19, https://doi.org/10.25071/1920-7336.30602. Accessed 1 December 2021.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Pirie, S.. ( 1990;), ‘ The origins of a political trial: The sanctuary movement and political justice. ’, Yale Journal of Law & the Humanities, 2:2, pp. 381–416, http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.13051/7424. Accessed 1 December 2021.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Ridgley, J.. ( 2013;), ‘ Cities of refuge: Immigration enforcement, police, and the insurgent genealogies of citizenship in U.S. sanctuary cities. ’, Urban Geography, 29:1, pp. 53–77.
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Rygiel, K.. ( 2016;), ‘ Dying to live: Migrant deaths and citizenship politics along European borders: Transgressions, disruptions, and mobilizations. ’, Citizenship Studies, 20:5, pp. 1–16.
     [Google Scholar]
  52. Scheuerman, W. E.. ( 2019;), ‘ Donald Trump meets Carl Schmitt. ’, Philosophy and Social Criticism, 45:9&10, pp. 1170–85.
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Scott-Railton, T.. ( 2018;), ‘ A legal sanctuary: How the religious freedom restoration act could protect sanctuary churches. ’, The Yale Law Journal, 128:2, pp. 254–543, https://ssrn.com/abstract=3269667. Accessed 1 December 2021.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Shoemaker, K.. ( 2011), Sanctuary and Crime in the Middle Ages, 400–1500, New York:: Fordham University Press;.
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Slack, J.,, Martínez, D. E., and Lee, A. E.. ( 2016;), ‘ The geography of border militarization: Violence, death and health in Mexico and the United States. ’, Journal of Latin American Geography, 15:1, pp. 7–32.
     [Google Scholar]
  56. Varsanyi, M.,, Lewis, P.,, Provine, D. M., and Decker, S.. ( 2012;), ‘ A multilayered jurisdictional patchwork: Immigration federalism in the United States. ’, Law and Policy, 34:2, pp. 138–58, https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdfdirect/10.1111/j.1467-9930.2011.00356.x?download=true. Accessed 1 December 2021.
     [Google Scholar]
  57. Villazor, R. C., and Gulasekaram, P.. ( 2018;), ‘ The new sanctuary and anti-sanctuary movements. ’, UC Davis Law Review, 52, pp. 549–69.
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Villazor, R. C., and Gulasekaram, P.. ( 2019;), ‘ Sanctuary networks. ’, Minnesota Law Review, 72, pp. 1209–83.
     [Google Scholar]
  59. Wadhia, S. S.. ( 2019), Banned: Immigration Enforcement in the Time of Trump, New York:: NYU Press;.
     [Google Scholar]
  60. Washington, J.. ( 2020), The Dispossessed: A Story of Asylum and the US–Mexican Border and Beyond, London:: Verso;.
     [Google Scholar]
  61. Wild, K.. ( 2010;), ‘ The new sanctuary movement: When moral mission means breaking the law, and the consequences for churches and illegal immigrants. ’, Santa Clara Law Review, 50:3, pp. 981–1016, https://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/lawreview/vol50/iss3/7. Accessed 1 December 2021.
     [Google Scholar]
  62. Wiltfang, G., and McAdam, D.. ( 1990;), ‘ The costs and risks of social activism: A study of sanctuary movement activism. ’, Social Forces, 69:4, pp. 987–1010.
     [Google Scholar]
  63. Wray-Lake, L.,, Wells, R.,, Alvis, L.,, Delgado, S.,, Syvertsen, A. K., and Metzger, A.. ( 2018;), ‘ Being a Latinx adolescent under a Trump presidency: Analysis of Latinx youth’s reactions to immigration politics. ’, Children and Youth Services Review, 87, pp. 192–204, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2018.02.032. Accessed 1 December 2021.
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Kocher, Austin. ( 2022;), ‘ Welcoming the stranger in Trump’s America: Notes on the everyday processes of constructing and enduring sanctuary. ’, Hospitality & Society 12:2, pp. 165–83, https://doi.org/10.1386/hosp_00050_1
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1386/hosp_00050_1
Loading
  • Article Type: Article
Keyword(s): deportation defense campaign; ethnography; immigrant welcome; radical hospitality; religious activism; sanctuary church; spaces of refuge; undocumented immigration

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a success
Invalid data
An error occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error