Transnationalizing Sanctuary: Advocating for Firewall Policies in the UN, EU and Council of Europe

The term “firewall policies” generally refers to the prohibition of public servants not directly charged with border enforcement — in hospitals, schools, administrations, etc. — to collect and share information about immigrants’ legal status. The aim of such policies is to provide a safe environment for irregular immigrants to participate in society, make use of institutions, and report crimes without fear of persecution. Such firewall policies are most often associated with sub-national politics, being considered a defining feature of American sanctuary cities. Increasingly, however, firewalls have also become a topic at the international and supranational levels. Since 2016, the largest European advocacy network for irregular immigrants, PICUM, has adopted firewalls as one of their key advocacy goals. In the same year, the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance of the Council of Europe issued a general policy recommendation calling for the creation of firewalls. Firewalls also feature as a key recommendation within the UN’s Global Compact of Migration. This paper investigates the extent to which international organizations and supranational institutions have become sites for transnational advocacy for sanctuary policies, and analyzes the form, content and effects of such transnational advocacy. By analyzing the transnational mobilization for firewall policies in the international arena, this article repositions the research agenda on sanctuary beyond the ambit of local-level policies and within a broader global geopolitics of migration enforcement, resistance and solidarity. It argues that sanctuary politics serves more to disrupt old exclusive notions of territory-based membership than to establish new inclusive forms of local city-zenship.