Contrary to critics’ claims, the decision of so-called “sanctuary cities” not to cooperate with federal authorities does not result in an increase in crime — nor does it result in fewer deportations of those with violent criminal convictions, according to a new report from Stanford University that looks at more than 200 “sanctuary” jurisdictions in the U.S.

“The findings appear to rebut the Trump administration’s rhetoric about the policies’ dire effects on public safety,” Nick Miroff writes in The Washington Post. The report explains that while sanctuary policies reduce overall deportations by one-third, they do not reduce deportations of people convicted of violent crimes.

In fact, Miroff adds, “violent criminals continued to be deported at the same pace because the sanctuary policies do little to prevent U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials from taking those offenders into custody. As the study’s lead researcher David K. Hausman put it: “Sanctuary policies do serve a protective role, but there’s not the cost to public safety that critics claim.”

Welcome to Thursday’s edition of Noorani’s Notes. If you have a story to share from your own community, please send it to me at [email protected].

HIDDEN COMMON GROUND – The late Iowa Republican Gov. Robert D. Ray played an instrumental role in resettling and welcoming refugees from Southeast Asia to his state in the 1970s. As part of the USA TODAY Network’s Hidden Common Ground project, the Des Moines Register’s Lee Rood writes about Republican Polk County Supervisor Robert Brownell, who has bucked his political party to continue the state’s tradition of welcoming refugees. In recent years, Brownell has become a “true partner” to refugee groups, and this year “helped secure county-owned computers and funding so that students from refugee families in metro Des Moines could participate in remote learning during the COVID-19 pandemic.” As for the Trump administration’s further cuts to refugee resettlement, Brownell “disagrees profoundly” with the decision: “New refugees here have slowed to hardly a trickle, and that’s not good for us economically and culturally.’”

LAST CHANCE – Heading into the final presidential debate of the 2020 election season this evening, the American people have yet to hear details about the immigration platforms of either presidential candidate. “To make it through the election season without a robust discussion of immigration priorities and policies would be a grave mistake and a missed opportunity to define the contours of one of the most pressing issues of our time,” writes Sarah Sherman-Stokes, a clinical associate professor and associate director of the Immigrants’ Rights and Human Trafficking Program at Boston University School of Law, in an op-ed for The Hill. Over on Medium, I wrote for America is Better that Trump hasn’t been touting his drastic immigration changes on the campaign trail as much as one would expect because, at the end of the day, “[it] is a victory lap with no fans.”

300,000 DENIED – Meanwhile, a new report from the Immigrant Legal Resource Center and Boundless Immigration, “Denying the Right to Vote,” reveals that up to 300,000 immigrants who are eligible but not yet naturalized will be unable to vote in this year’s election due to the “newly instituted policies that deviate from two decades of regulatory precedent regarding the naturalization of U.S. citizens during presidential election years.” Andy J. Semotiuk writes in Forbes: “Voter registration deadlines have already passed for many states including Florida and Texas, where large numbers of would-be citizens are still waiting on USCIS to complete their pending naturalization applications.” The report notes that a significant portion of applicants primarily seek naturalization to secure the right to vote, including in “closely watched presidential election states including Texas (35 percent), and Pennsylvania (35 percent).” Read the full report here.

‘UNICORN’ – Francisco is a rare case: a Honduran immigrant who fled violence in his home country and successfully gained asylum in the U.S. amid a pandemic, under harsh and confusing immigration laws implemented by the Trump administration, despite representing himself in court — all after enduring months in a tent community in Matamoros, Mexico. “On the surface, Francisco’s story looks like a beacon of hope. But the reality is that his victory was a combination of luck and the moderate advantage he had over most asylum-seekers: He came from a slightly wealthier family and had access to higher education,” Adolfo Flores explains in BuzzFeed News. As immigration attorney Jodi Goodwin notes, “[so] much of any case, whether you have a lawyer or not, has to do with which judge, which trial attorney you have and other factors like is it Friday afternoon and is everyone tired and nobody wants to do cross-examination.”

LITTLE AMERICA – This week’s episode of our Vote of Conscience series for “Only in America” is an especially fun one — I talked to Kumail Nanjiani and Emily V. Gordon, the executive producers of Little America, an Apple TV anthology series that tells the immigrant stories we don’t often hear in our daily discourse. They explained how they aim to capture the nuance and humanity of immigrant stories, and we discussed the power of storytelling, how to create a sense of connectedness amid division, and what’s missing from conversations on immigration.

Thanks for reading,

Ali