Did Rural American Farmers Vote To Deport Their Workforce? 
 
 At the ballot box, rural Americans were unfazed by what would seem a contradictory choice: voting to remove the low-wage workers that are, arguably, the linchpin of the rural economy. Farming is a high risk, low margin business endeavor, largely propped up by government subsidies and a marginalized workforce willing to toil 80 hours a week at appallingly low rates of pay – employment conditions which few American-born citizens would accept. 
 
 Apparently rural voters were willing to overlook this inconvenient truth, or perhaps they assume that Trump will not follow through on his promises. 
 
 Voter Turnout in Urban vs. Rural Communities 
 
 Trump won the vote in upwards of 90 percent of rural counties; in the 1,299 rural counties he won, he garnered 85 percent of the vote. In contrast, Hillary Clinton, who supported a path to citizenship for the nation’s estimated 11 million undocumented workers, won close to 90 percent of urban counties. 
 
 How Farmworkers Are Reacting 
 
 Unsurprisingly, millions of undocumented farmworkers are in a state of panic. 
 
 KION, a radio station in Monterrey County, California, where an estimated 55,000 undocumented workers tend to vast expanses of lettuce and strawberry fields, reported widespread concern. “I’m really scared,” said one farmworker who was interviewed. “Me and my roommate already have our truck loaded and ready to leave.” 
 
 Elsewhere in California, Latino immigrants took to the streets to voice their opposition to the president-elect. The day after the election, a group of protesters in downtown Los Angeles shouted, “Aqui estamos y no nos vamos,” or, “We are here and we are not leaving,” according to Voices of America, a US-based news service that broadcasts in 45 languages. “I’m afraid for my family… our friends and for my coworkers,” said one protester. “Our status and our way of life in this country are in limbo,” said another. 
 
 But Is It Possible? 
 
 Many immigration experts have said Trump’s mass deportation plan is implausible, and would likely be ineffective at reversing the tide of immigrants from south of the border. The Trump campaign has even acknowledged that his initial statements on deportation may have been more bluster than substance. More likely than rounding up all 11 million illegal immigrants, is that Trump would reverse DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals), President Obama’s executive order, which granted legal status – and a work permit – to immigrants who entered the country illegally prior to their 16th birthday. 
 
 The paper trail associated with DACA workers would make them easy targets for deportation, compared to the millions of undocumented workers hiding in the shadows. 
 
 Over 1 million young illegal immigrants, the vast majority from Mexico, have been approved for DACA benefits since the program began in 2012. DACA does not provide a path to citizenship, but was intended as an interim reprieve while democrat and republican members of Congress battled over immigration reform, a battle which pro-reform democrats ultimately lost. Because DACA is an executive order, which means it did not require congressional approval to be enacted, President-elect Trump could overturn it on his first day in office without recourse – a campaign promise that he has not backed down from. The paper trail associated with DACA workers would make them easy targets for deportation, compared to the millions of undocumented workers hiding in the shadows. 
 
 Not that there won’t be intense political pressure from a coalition of immigrant rights groups to soften Trump’s anti-immigrant stance. The United Farm Workers, a Latino agricultural union based in California, which also advocates nationally on behalf of immigrant farm workers, will no doubt be one of those, leveraging its deep ties in Washington – UFW worked closely with the Obama administration and Clinton campaign on immigration reform – to block the president-elect’s deportation efforts. 
 
 What Does the UFW Think? 
 
 In an emailed statement to Modern Farmer on the day after the election, Arturo Rodriguez, who took over as UFW president following the death of founder Cesar Chavez in 1993, said: 
 
 “Making progress will be more difficult, but our practice of organizing for the long term will let us continue to win justice… We reaffirm our confidence in the American people and in our Si Se Puede! attitude… As the challenges increase so does our commitment and determination to afford all farm workers and low-income working families the opportunities and respect they deserve.† 
 
 Rodriguez, who also spoke with us just prior to the election about his hopes for the next president, did note one bright spot on the night of Novermber 8th: Joe Arpaio, the sheriff of Maricopa County, Arizona (where Phoenix is located), who is known for his unrelenting persecution of Mexican immigrants, was not re-elected. He was seeking his seventh term. Recently referred to as the Donald Trump of Arizona, Arpaio has long been loathed by immigrant activists and progressive Americans alike as a symbol of xenophobic sentiment within the American political and law enforcement system. 
 
 “We have confronted and overcome political adversity many times before,” said Rodriguez in his statement. “What remains unchanged is faith in our history and practice of organizing for the long term, running the race as a marathon and not just as a sprint. That faith will allow us to continue to win justice.” May it be so. ||||| Mayor Rahm Emanuel on Monday won praise from some representatives of Chicago's immigrant community for going to court to block President Donald Trump's Department of Justice from withholding some police grant funding from so-called sanctuary cities. 
 
 Some of those same activists, though, contend Emanuel should do even more to prevent police from helping federal officials deport Chicago immigrants who entered the country without the required legal documentation. The mayor also caught more flak from U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who in stepping up his rhetoric said "no amount of federal taxpayer dollars will help a city that refuses to help its own residents." 
 
 The wide array of views coming from Emanuel's City Hall, the White House and immigrant protection groups is a sign of the complex debate the mayor has entered by filing the lawsuit. It's all further complicated by differing views on whether sanctuary city status fosters or hinders crime — as reflected in Sessions' harsh words and the city's contention that the Trump "administration's rhetoric is divorced from reality." 
 
 Emanuel's lawsuit, filed Monday in federal court, asks a judge to block the Trump administration from enforcing three new conditions it included last week in applications for Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant money. The city uses the grant to help buy police cars, purchase other equipment and fund an anti-violence program. Those applications are due Sept. 5, and the city wants a court order before the deadline, said Corporation Counsel Ed Siskel, the city's top attorney. 
 
 The new conditions outlined by Sessions' Justice Department: sharing immigration status information with federal officials enforcing deportation laws, providing unlimited police station access to those officials and giving them 48-hours notice of an arrested person's release in cases of potential immigration violations. 
 
 City officials contend in the lawsuit that they do share immigration status information when they have it, but that's rare because the city doesn't keep it in the normal course of business. 
 
 Providing unfettered station access would interfere with police department practices, delay release of people being held and violate the 10th Amendment by "commandeering" local government functions, the lawsuit states. And holding people for 48 hours without a warrant or probable cause that they have committed a crime would violate 4th Amendment search and seizure limitations, it adds. 
 
 The suit also contends that the Justice Department has no authority to set conditions on the Byrne grant funding and is attempting to usurp the Congressional power of the purse. In short, the suit deems the conditions "unlawful and unconstitutional." 
 
 This year, the city was counting on receiving $3.2 million from the grants in question, a relatively miniscule portion of the city's overall $9.8 billion budget. 
 
 "We are at a time when every bit counts and every resource matters in this fight," Siskel said. "In addition, we are bringing this legal challenge because the rhetoric and the threats from this administration, embodied in these new restrictions placed on public safety grant funds, are breeding a culture and a climate of fear within the communities in our city." 
 
 City corporation counsel Ed Siskel talks at Dirksen Federal Building about the Emanuel administration lawsuit against the Donald Trump Justice Department about sanctuary city rules. Aug. 7, 2017 (John Byrne / Chicago Tribune) City corporation counsel Ed Siskel talks at Dirksen Federal Building about the Emanuel administration lawsuit against the Donald Trump Justice Department about sanctuary city rules. Aug. 7, 2017 (John Byrne / Chicago Tribune) SEE MORE VIDEOS 
 
 Plus, the fate of Chicago's grant application also would affect other local Illinois governments that include their funding requests in Chicago's application, according to the lawsuit. They are Cook County, Bellwood, Calumet City, Chicago Heights, Cicero, Dolton, Evanston, Harvey, Maywood, Riverdale and Skokie. 
 
 And the outcome of the suit could have ramifications for far-flung local and state governments with sanctuary laws on the books. They include New York, Philadelphia, Miami and the state of California. 
 
 So it was no surprise that groups like Illinois Coalition for Immigration and Refugee Rights backed the mayor's move. "We are all for defending Chicago's policy with respect to immigration," said Fred Tsao, the group's senior policy counsel. He also said "the law is on the side of the city." 
 
 Yet Tsao's group is part of a broader coalition that for months has been pushing Emanuel to remove four exemptions from the city's Welcoming City Ordinance, which sets its status as a sanctuary city. 
 
 That ordinance bars police from providing federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials access to people in local custody. It also prohibits allowing ICE agents to use police facilities for interviews or investigations, and bars on-duty officers from responding to ICE questions or talking to ICE officials prior to a person's release from custody. 
 
 But it does allow police to provide ICE officials access to immigrants suspected of entering the country illegally who are wanted on a criminal warrant, face criminal charges, have serious criminal convictions or are listed on Chicago gang databases. 
 
 The American Civil Liberties Union maintains those exemptions, which could result in holding in custody someone not guilty of a recent crime, "expose the city to liability for violations of the 4th Amendment," according to a letter the ACLU sent to the mayor and aldermen last month. 
 
 Ald. Carlos Ramirez-Rosa, 35th, has been pushing to get Chicago to join other cities that have eliminated similar exemptions, but the Emanuel administration so far has rebuffed his efforts, as recently as Friday by canceling a meeting on the issue. 
 
 "It's quite funny and hypocritical that at the same time as (Emanuel is) putting forward this lawsuit saying that we want to defend the Constitution, here the ACLU has said that our own sanctuary city policy is in violation of the supreme law of the land," said Ramirez-Rosa, who also stressed that he supports the lawsuit. 
 
 Ramirez-Rosa's view runs counter to the image Emanuel has tried to portray on the issue in mostly Democratic Chicago, which has a significant Latino population that's become increasingly politically active. ||||| Hispanic organizers are struggling to tamp down panic in their communities as federal authorities begin to implement President Trump's executive orders on immigration. 
 
 One of the first cases to receive national attention, the deportation of Arizona resident Guadalupe Garcia de Rayos, has put undocumented and mixed status communities on edge. 
 
 "It's fair to say we’re all extremely troubled by the deportation action we saw take place yesterday in Arizona," said Janet Murguia, president of the National Council of La Raza. 
 
 "The first deportation [after] his executive order is of a working mom with two U.S. kids," she added. 
 
 On the campaign trail, Trump initially promised to enact a deportation force to deport all 11 million undocumented immigrants, starting with dangerous criminals. 
 
 “They’re going to be out of here so fast, your head will spin,” Trump told Fox News in August. “As far as the rest, we’re going to go through the process, like they are now — perhaps with a lot more energy.” 
 
 Trump softened his tone somewhat over the campaign, saying at the final presidential debate in October that he would prioritize the removal of "bad hombres." 
 
 And as president-elect, Trump said his government would seek out "three or four million" dangerous criminals immigrants for deportation. 
 
 Many Hispanic advocates feel that the Garcia de Rayos case shows the Trump administration will aggressively pursue all undocumented immigrants. 
 
 ADVERTISEMENT 
 
 "This reaffirms that when the Trump administration said they would go after criminals, they really meant everybody," Murguia said. 
 
 The perception that Trump is shifting back to his early campaign proposals has shaken many Hispanics, including many who are legally in the country. 
 
 "The uncertainty and the confusion is prevalent with undocumented, legal residents and also citizens," said Telemundo anchorman José Diaz-Balart. "There are millions of mixed status families in the United States of America." 
 
 And community organizers admit they have few tools to quell the trepidation. 
 
 NCLR is one of many organizations that has set up a legal defense structure and started programs to inform immigrants of their rights, but under current law, an undocumented immigrant who comes in contact with federal enforcement officers has relatively few options. 
 
 "We want people to stay calm and we want to give them assurances but we can’t give them assurances," Murguía said. 
 
 Community organizations and media are focusing on keeping people informed of their options and the government's ability to persecute undocumented immigrants. 
 
 "What we are asking of the community is to get more plugged into community organizations," said Erika Andiola, political director of Our Revolution, a political action group spun off Sen. Bernie Sanders Bernard (Bernie) SandersTentative deal reached to give Disney World workers an hour Sanders praises Dem move to limit role of superdelegates in picking nominee Democrats move to limit role of superdelegates in presidential nominations MORE's (I-Vt.) presidential campaign. 
 
 "[We're] providing know-your-rights training, things you can do to protect yourself if you have a house raid or work raid," Andiola said. 
 
 Diaz-Balart, the anchor for Noticieros Telemundo, the network's nightly news program, is hosting a town hall event Sunday for his viewers to better understand the administration's immigration actions. 
 
 "[Immigrants are] now asking, 'how is this going to have an impact on me?'" said Diaz-Balart. 
 
 "It’s a town hall that is going to be dealing with the questions that we hear over and over and over again from the people that we serve," he said. "It’s not about telling people what they want to hear, it’s about making sure the people are informed about things." 
 
 Through his executive orders, Trump went after so-called "sanctuary cities" that restrict the degree to which their law enforcement agents collaborate with federal immigration enforcement. He has also redefined who could be labeled a "criminal alien." 
 
 That redefinition greatly expanded the number of undocumented immigrants liable to be targeted for removal, beyond the "three or four million" that Trump had mentioned. 
 
 José Magaña-Salgado, an attorney at the Immigrant Legal Resource Center, cited a study that said as many as 8 million people could now be targeted for deportation. 
 
 Under Trump's order, the definition of criminality was expanded to include misdemeanors like illicitly crossing the border. 
 
 It also expanded the definitions for immigrants to be considered priorities for deportation. Foreigners who have "committed acts that constitute a chargeable criminal offense" are priorities, even before conviction. It also includes those who have committed "fraud or willful misrepresentation in connection with any official matter or application before a governmental agency," a category that includes using fake Social Security numbers to work. 
 
 While Trump campaigned on the prospect of removing dangerous criminals, Magaña-Salgado said the very structure of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) would provide an incentive for indiscriminate enforcement. 
 
 "The general philosophy of ICE agents and CBP agents, they view their job as expelling as many people from the country as possible," said Magaña-Salgado. 
 
 "It benefits them to have high deportation numbers because they can justify their budget, they can justify their mission," he added. 
 
 And cases like Garcia de Rayos provide an easy target for federal agents. 
 
 Garcia de Rayos was apprehended during a yearly inspection at her local ICE headquarters, in which she voluntarily presented herself keeping with orders given to her when she was originally apprehended. 
 
 As a low-risk offender — Garcia de Rayos was convicted of using a fake Social Security Number to work — she was not on the Obama administration's deportation priority list despite have been slated for deportation by an immigration judge. 
 
 Beyond the detention of Garcia de Rayos, ICE conducted large raids this week on homes and workplaces that further alarmed Hispanic communities. 
 
 Karen Tumlin, legal director of the National Immigration Law Center, said agents denied access to immigration lawyers after one such raid in Los Angeles that rounded up about 100 people. 
 
 "Immigration attorneys flocked to the scene," Tumlin said. "They were shut out." 
 
 "[It's] absolutely unacceptable and potentially unlawful," she added. 
 
 Similar cases to Garcia de Rayos could also attract the attention of federal enforcement officers because of the shortage of immigration judges to prosecute cases. People who have already been slated for deportation by a judge can be removed without further due process. 
 
 The lack of immigration judges is "certainly going to be a constraint," said Magaña-Salgado. 
 
 But agents can use expedited removal procedures, curbed under the Obama administration but not taken off the books, to get detainees to accept a quick deportation over a lengthy wait for an immigration judge, in many cases while incarcerated. 
 
 "They’re going to use that tool to take people out of the court system and due process," Magaña-Salgado said. 
 
 Activists warn that going after easy targets can damage communities in several ways. 
 
 People who would otherwise be economically active could go into hiding, trust in law enforcement agencies could be diminished, and dangerous criminals could more easily slip through the cracks as federal agents pursue non-dangerous undocumented immigrants. 
 
 "People want to comply with the enforcement agencies," Murguia said. "They’re supposed to report in with these check ins; if they see they’re going to put themselves at risk, it’s a very difficult situation." 
 
 "These are gut wrenching, heart-breaking stories," she added. "In a civilized society, we can’t find a better way to deal with these issues?" 
 
 The Telemundo town hall will air Sunday, Feb. 12 at 7 p.m. EST and will feature Alma Rosa Nieto, an immigration lawyer who will answer questions on specific cases. ||||| Attorney General Jeff Sessions' combative statement, which accused Chicago officials of adopting "an official policy of protecting criminal aliens," is likely to be well received by President Donald Trump. | Andrew Harnik/AP Sessions blasts Rahm Emanuel over sanctuary suit 
 
 Attorney General Jeff Sessions lashed out at Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel on Monday, delivering an unusually caustic reaction to a new lawsuit challenging the Trump administration's plans to crack down on so-called sanctuary cities. 
 
 Emanuel announced the filing of the suit earlier in the day, complaining about a new Justice Department policy attempting to cut off grants to police departments that decline to cooperate with federal immigration officials. 
 
 Story Continued Below 
 
 Sessions' barbed reply argued that record numbers of murders in Chicago in recent years were attributable at least in part to Emanuel's decision to stick with a sanctuary policy that encourages police to ignore the immigration status of those they encounter. 
 
 "No amount of federal taxpayer dollars will help a city that refuses to help its own residents," Sessions said. "To a degree perhaps unsurpassed by any other jurisdiction, the political leadership of Chicago has chosen deliberately and intentionally to adopt a policy that obstructs this country’s lawful immigration system." 
 
 The attorney general's combative statement, which accused Chicago officials of adopting "an official policy of protecting criminal aliens," is likely to be well received by President Donald Trump. He has regularly blasted Chicago over crime, accusing it of being too lax in its response to the surge in violence there. 
 
 Chicago Police Superintendent Eddie Johnson pushed back against the attorney general's portrayal. 
 
 "Undocumented immigrants are not driving violence in Chicago, and that's why I want our officers focused on community policing and not trying to be the immigration police," he said. 
 
 He also said that "the federal government's plans will hamper community policing and public safety." 
 
 Sessions' statement comes amid what appears to be his concerted effort to curry favor with Trump after the president made a series of comments last month expressing dissatisfaction with Sessions and said he regretted picking him as attorney general. 
 
 The most reliable politics newsletter. Sign up for POLITICO Playbook and get the latest news, every morning — in your inbox. Email Sign Up By signing up you agree to receive email newsletters or alerts from POLITICO. You can unsubscribe at any time. 
 
 "This is astounding given the unprecedented violent crime surge in Chicago, with the number of murders in 2016 surpassing both New York and Los Angeles combined," Sessions said. "The city’s leaders cannot follow some laws and ignore others and reasonably expect this horrific situation to improve." 
 
 “This administration will not simply give away grant dollars to city governments that proudly violate the rule of law and protect criminal aliens at the expense of public safety," Sessions added. "So it’s this simple: Comply with the law or forgo taxpayer dollars." 
 
 However, the new lawsuit argues it's the Justice Department that isn't complying with the law. No law obliges local governments to actively assist immigration officers or to notify them when illegal immigrants are released from jail. 
 
 The Trump administration is trying to add such requirements to certain law-enforcement grants issued in the future, but Chicago's suit contends that Justice Department officials lack the authority to add anti-sanctuary-city requirements beyond a single provision barring grant recipients from policies that punish officers for contacting federal officials about a suspected undocumented immigrant. 
 
 Other cities are considering similar lawsuits. Indeed, localities in California and Massachusetts have filed legal challenges to an early Trump executive order that many saw as threatening a broad crackdown on sanctuary cities. Emanuel and many law enforcement leaders argue that the policies benefit public safety by encouraging undocumented immigrants to cooperate and communicate with police. 
 
 “Chicago is a welcoming city and always will be, and we will not be blackmailed by President Trump's Justice Department," Emanuel said as he announced the suit. "Forcing us to choose between our values and our police department’s philosophy of community policing is a false choice, and it is a choice that would ultimately undermine our public safety agenda." ||||| Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has said over and over he would force undocumented immigrants to leave the country as president. Now a meeting with a Hispanic advisory panel and statements from his surrogates are calling into question whether that's still the plan. (Sarah Parnass/The Washington Post) 
 
 After spending a few days reflecting on his immigration stances and consulting with Hispanic supporters, Donald Trump on Monday detailed how he would deal with the millions of immigrants illegally living in the United States: Enforce laws that are already on the books and continue to do what President Obama is doing, although "perhaps with a lot more energy." 
 
 This strategy marks a sudden change for the Republican nominee, who has presented himself as a politically incorrect outsider who is not afraid to take extreme measures to combat illegal immigration, such as deporting 11 million people or constructing a massive wall along the Southern border. For more than a year, Trump insisted that all illegal immigrants "have got to go" and that he would create a "deportation force" to carry out the task. 
 
 Trump struck a starkly different tone during an interview with Bill O'Reilly that aired on Fox News on Monday night. Trump said he would separate the country's undocumented immigrants into two groups: The "bad ones" who would be kicked out of the country as soon as he takes office and "everybody else" who would go through the same process that the Obama Administration is currently using. 
 
 "The first thing we're going to do if and when I win is we're going to get rid of all of the bad ones," Trump said. "We've got gang members, we have killers, we have a lot of bad people that have to get out of this country. We're going to get them out, and the police know who they are. They're known by law enforcement who they are. We don't do anything. They go around killing people and hurting people, and they're going to be out of this country so fast your head will spin. We have existing laws that allow you to do that." 
 
 [Donald Trump delays giving an immigration speech] 
 
 The United States has long deported illegal immigrants who are violent criminals, and Obama's administration has focused on targeting “felons, not families.” As the United States recently saw a surge of tens of thousands of women and children fleeing violence and corruption in Central America, the administration has deported all new arrivals who did not qualify for political asylum in hopes of deterring others from making the dangerous journey — a stance that has angered immigrant rights groups. Clinton has said that she would deport only violent criminals and terrorists. 
 
 Trump has long called for quicker removal of illegal immigrants who become violent. On Monday night, Trump explained how he would address nonviolent illegal immigrants. 
 
 "As far as everybody else, we're going to go through the process," Trump said. "What people don't know is that Obama got tremendous numbers of people out of the country. Bush, the same thing. Lots of people were brought out of the country with the existing laws. Well, I'm going to do the same thing." 
 
 
 
 Donald Trump at a rally in Dimondale, Mich. (Carlo Allegri/Reuters) 
 
 Later in the interview, Trump again explained how this group of people would be treated. 
 
 "As far as the rest, we're going to go through the process, like they are now, perhaps with a lot more energy, and we're going to do it only through the system of laws," Trump said. 
 
 At one point, O'Reilly asked Trump about expanding the court system to adjudicate all of these cases and setting up detention centers to house people as they wait for their immigration cases to be heard. Trump quickly batted down the suggestion that he would house people in detention centers. 
 
 [ In the latest shift, Donald Trump’s campaign seems to waver on mass deportations ] 
 
 "You don't have to put them in a detention center," Trump said. "Bill, you're the first one to mention 'detention center.' You don't have to put them in a detention center. ... I'm not going to put them in a detention center. No." 
 
 O'Reilly said that he suggested detention centers because Trump had previously likened his plans to mass deportations carried out during the 1950s under President Dwight D. Eisenhower. 
 
 "I said that it's something that has been done in a very strong manner," Trump said, explaining why he had originally referenced the historic deportations. "I don't agree with that. I'm not talking about detention centers. I have very, very good relationships with a lot of people, a lot of Hispanic people. We're talking about it." ||||| Donald Trump speaks at a rally in Chicago. | AP Photo/John Locher Defying Trump, Chicago will continue as immigrant sanctuary 
 
 CHICAGO — Joining other cities around the country, Chicago is pledging to remain a sanctuary city for undocumented immigrants, an act of defiance in the face of Donald Trump’s past promise to cut off those cities from federal funding. 
 
 In sanctuary cities, local law enforcement officials aren’t required to alert U.S. Immigration and Customs authorities about the immigration status of individuals with whom they come in contact. 
 
 Story Continued Below 
 
 On Monday, Chicago's elected officials, including Mayor Rahm Emanuel, are expected to hold a news conference to formally discuss how the city will retain its sanctuary status. Aldermen are expected to call on Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner to pressure Trump to back off his vow to interfere with funding. 
 
 “Across the country and in Chicago and Illinois ... young men and women [are] very distraught about this,” Chicago Alderman Danny Solis told POLITICO Illinois on Sunday. 
 
 Solis is among those planning to attend the news conference with Emanuel. "There’s some people, though I disagree with them, but I have some respect for — Paul Ryan, Reince Priebus," Solis said, referring to the House speaker and the RNC chairman who will serve as Trump's chief of staff. "I’m hoping that those guys have much more influence on Trump and what needs to be done not only on his first 100 days, but in his term." 
 
 Illinois Comptroller-elect Susana Mendoza, whose parents are Mexican immigrants, called on Rauner to take a stand on the issue. 
 
 “As a leader of this state, the governor, and everyone in a leadership position, should be saying it’s wrong,” Mendoza told POLITICO Illinois on Sunday. “I would expect that the governor would say, ‘that’s ridiculous.’ Besides moral bankruptcy, it’s bad fiscal policy for the city or any city.” 
 
 The move is largely motivated by elected officials who say they’ve heard from terrified residents, including so-called Dreamers (children whose parents entered the country illegally), who fear imminent deportation. On Sunday, Emanuel’s office released a statement directing those with questions or in need of legal resources to call 311. 
 
 “I want to assure all of our families that Chicago is and will remain a sanctuary city,” Emanuel said in a statement. “Chicago has been a city of immigrants since it was founded. We have always welcomed people of all faiths and backgrounds, and while the administration will change, our values and our commitment to inclusion will not.” 
 
 Since Tuesday’s election, other cities that have affirmed their commitment to remaining sanctuaries include New York, Los Angeles, Seattle, Philadelphia and San Francisco. 
 
 There are dozens of sanctuary cities in the United States and more than 100 jurisdictions have policies on the books that limit compliance with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. 
 
 In a "60 Minutes" interview on Sunday, Trump vowed to deport 2 million to 3 million undocumented immigrants, but seemed to make a distinction between ones who had committed crimes — presumably beyond immigrating illegally — and ones who hadn't. 
 
 “What we are going to do is get the people that are criminal and have criminal records -- gang members, drug dealers -- where a lot of these people, probably two million, it could be even three million, we are getting them out of our country or we are going to incarcerate," he said. "But we’re getting them out of our country, they’re here illegally. 
 
 “After the border is secure and after everything gets normalized, we’re going to make a determination on the people that they’re talking about who are terrific people, they’re terrific people but we are gonna make a determination at that. But before we make that determination, it’s very important, we are going to secure our border.” 
 
 The immigration issue was central to Trump’s candidacy, framed by his pledge to build a wall along the U.S. border with Mexico. 
 
 Neither Trump nor Rauner spokespeople responded to request for comment on Sunday.
– In an interview with CBS' 60 Minutes on Sunday, President-elect Donald Trump said his first priority will be arresting and deporting undocumented immigrants with criminal records, and he put a number to the effort: "What we are going to do is get the people that are criminal and have criminal records, gang members, drug dealers, where a lot of these people, probably 2 million, it could be even 3 million, we are getting them out of our country or we are going to incarcerate." How does that number hold up, and what's the reaction been? The rundown: Washington Post's Fact Checker and FiveThirtyEight find Trump comes up short. While a rep for the president-elect called out a Department of Homeland Security report that cited 1.9 million "removable criminal aliens" as of fiscal year 2013, both point out that phrase also includes lawful permanent residents and those with temporary visas, meaning size of the group Trump was referring to is south of that 1.9 million. Both also cite the number 820,000—the Migration Policy Institute's estimate of undocumented immigrants with criminal records. In his first press conference since the election, President Obama addressed the topic of young undocumented immigrants and advised Trump to "think long and hard" before endangering their status. BuzzFeed has more. Trump won't find an ally among the LAPD. "We are not going to work in conjunction with Homeland Security on deportation efforts," Police Chief Charlie Beck tells the LA Times, continuing the department's decades-old stance. Los Angeles is a "sanctuary city"—meaning ones where police and city workers aren’t obligated to turn undocumented immigrants they encounter into the feds, per Politico—and it's not alone. NPR reports there are 300 such cities and counties, and under Trump's First 100 Days plan they stand to lose federal funding if they don't change their tune. That didn't scare Mayor Rahm Emmanuel, who on Monday emphasized Chicago "always will be a sanctuary city." Modern Farmer looks into one of the "great ironies in the election": that rural Americans voted for a candidate whose immigration policies could decimate the agricultural workforce.