Final answer:
Sanctuary cities are urban areas that refuse to cooperate with ICE in detaining illegal immigrants, facing threats of federal fund withdrawal. States like Arizona have implemented their laws, such as Senate Bill 1070, which have been partly overturned by the Supreme Court. The conflict between state and federal governance over immigration law remains a subject of extensive debate.
Step-by-step explanation:
The sanctuary cities are predominantly urban areas that have taken a stance of non-cooperation with federal immigration authorities, specifically Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), around detaining individuals based on their immigration status. These cities face potential repercussions from the federal government, which has threatened to withhold federal funds as a means to enforce cooperation in immigration law enforcement. This issue is deeply entrenched in the broader discussion on immigration policy and enforcement, where different states and local governments have responded with varying strategies, from Arizona's Senate Bill 1070 aiming to create difficulties for undocumented immigrants, to nationwide protests against legislations criminalizing undocumented status and aiding those with such status.
In the context of Arizona and other states, this tension between state and federal governance over immigration has led to legal challenges, like the Arizona v. United States case, where some state-level provisions conflicting with federal immigration law were struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court. However, this has not resolved the extensive debates regarding civil rights, law enforcement, and national security that surround the question of how to handle illegal immigration. The role of states in immigration, tensions over federalism, and various policies targeting illegal immigration, such as interior enforcement and states' authority to enforce federal immigration laws, continue to be salient and divisive issues.