Michael Murphy goes door to door in his native Taneytown and talks about illegal immigrants, America?s borders and national security.
“This issue is critical to our homeland security and American principles,” he tells people, urging them to support a resolution declaring Taneytown?s intolerance of illegal immigrants.
On a blustery Saturday in Taneytown, where almost the entire population of 5,500 is white, Murphy?s message resonates with many but repulses others.
The debate in this town at the foot of the Catoctin Mountains centers on a resolution declaring Taneytown would not be a “sanctuary city,” where the local government workers ask little or nothing about immigration status.
By contrast, other governments, from those of small towns like Takoma Park in Montgomery County to metropolises like New York City, have declared themselves sanctuary cities for illegals.
But in Taneytown, as in towns that have enacted laws targeting illegals, many insist the federal government has not done its job controlling immigration, so the town must do so.
The faces and the stories of the immigrants get lost in the headlines and heated debates on talk radio and the Internet, says Helen France.
France, 69, works at St. Joseph Catholic Church with the parish social ministry, which includes immigrants. She spent part of her Saturday watching a movie called “Strangers No Longer,” produced by Justice for Immigrants, a Catholic campaign calling for greater acceptance of immigrants, legal or illegal.
France says the Taneytown resolution makes her uneasy.
“It just gives the feeling that we are unwelcoming, not this kind, little country town that tries to do good things,” she said.
“I have a button that says, ?I love Taneytown,? and I still do. But I guess I may not have met some of the people.”
The resolution would make Taneytown the first “anti-sanctuary city” in Maryland, said Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, a nonpartisan think tank in Washington, D.C., that advocates stricter immigration policies.
“The passion points to the potential importance of a measure like this,” Krikorian said.
The resolution doesn?t give specifics about limiting illegal immigrants in Taneytown, so pro-immigration organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union would have a difficult time fighting it, Krikorian said. The Maryland ACLU did not return calls for comment.
In a lawsuit filed by the Pennsylvania ACLU, a federal court in July struck down as unconstitutional an ordinance in Hazelton, Pa., that threatened thousands of dollars in fines against landlords and employers for contracting illegal immigrants.
“Hazelton-type laws are designed to make life miserable for millions of immigrants,” said Vic Walczak, legal director of the Pennsylvania ACLU. “They promote distrust of all foreigners.”
Immigrants in Taneytown may already sense the distrust. Three contacted did not return several phone messages or declined to comment.
City Councilman Paul Chamberlain Jr., who proposed the resolution, emphasized that legal immigrants are not targeted.
Chamberlain, a business consultant and father of five whose resolution last year made Taneytown the first place in Maryland where English is the official language, acknowledges that illegal immigration has posed no problems in Taneytown.
But he fears illegals could flood the town, as he says they have in major cities throughout the country, taking blue-collar jobs away from citizens and increasing crime.
William Ramey, former Baltimore investigations supervisor for Immigrations and Customs Enforcement, strongly supports Chamberlain. Although he does not live in Taneytown, he said it is difficult to track where illegal immigrants are, but said they will go where they feel safe.
“A sovereign nation is one where people who come here will obey our laws, they will speak our language,” Chamberlain said.
Chamberlain?s resolutions have pitted him against Mayor Jim McCarron in a battle that has drawn national attention.
In the town?s January newsletter, the mayor took aim at the resolution: “What we really see here is an attempt to inflame and divide the city over an issue which we have no direct control over.”
Council vote tonight
» The City Council is expected to vote on the “anti-sanctuary city” resolution tonight. The 7:30 p.m. meeting has been moved to the fire department activities building at 49 Memorial Drive.
