Over several decades, this unAmerican public policy---which was mandated in several metropolitan cities---has resulted in a destructive cultural corruption of the entire democratic process in America.
So why would the elected governments of several large American cities---as well as some States---have enacted official public policy that completely disrespects America's immigration laws?
It would be understandable if America's immigration laws were misguided, racist, immoral, unConstitutional, or "unjust", but they are not. America enacted her immigration laws for very rational, moral, and worthwhile reasons: To promote and preserve the American dream---for all Americans---through controlled assimilation of new legal immigrants.
So why did the local governments of some large cities (and States like Massachusetts) institute official policies that forbid public agency employees---and even private employers---from exercising their patriotic civic duty?
The reason---given by locally-elected politicians---is that local government is not "responsible" for enforcing federal laws, and that local taxpayers could not afford the extra manpower or resources required to enforce such laws.
But in reality, liberal politicians don't want anyone enforcing America's immigration laws in their cities, because they have too much to lose by the removal of their city's illegal alien population: They receive federal funds based purely on population head count, and they want to continue growing a grateful voter base that will keep them in political power.
The public outpouring of their compassion for the "hard-working", undocumented "immigrant" is self-serving and calculated.
Sanctuary policies create a permanent magnet for illegal aliens and their anchor-baby "citizen" offspring. As those anchor-babies reach voting age, they will naturally vote for those politicians that will work to prevent their "undocumented" family-members from being arrested and deported. Eventually, the "citizen" relatives of illegal aliens begin to outnumber the voters in that city---who have never had an illegal alien relative---and the elections get hijacked by a subculture based upon crime and "ethnic solidarity."
Impatient "progressives" are calling for voting "rights" for "non-citizen" in local elections: (from San Francisco Wants to Let Non-Citizens Vote)
The [San Francisco] Board of Supervisors want to put a ballot measure on the November ballot that would let "non-citizens" who have children in SF schools vote in elections for the Board of Education in the city. [...] Shockingly, 1 out of every 3 students in San Francisco have parents who are not citizens.(and from ImmigrantVoting.org
"...Seven cities in Maryland and Massachusetts have passed laws allowing immigrants to vote in all local elections. New York City and Chicago have allowed immigrants to vote in local school board elections. Major U.S. jurisdictions, including Los Angeles, New York City, and Washington D.C., are currently considering proposals that would allow immigrants to participate in all local elections..."
The problem is that these "progressives" never seem to mention whether they are only talking about LEGAL immigrants. However, as long as liberal journalists don't ask them, they probably won't tell.