Mayor Danny Jones says Charleston won't protect undocumented immigrants from deportation under the Donald Trump administration.
He said there have been no previous efforts and he doesn't plan in the future to turn Charleston into a "sanctuary city."
Sanctuary cities offer protection to people who are in the country illegally.
"We don't want to pick that kind of fight, especially with this administration," Jones said Thursday.
While there is no universally accepted definition for a sanctuary city, the Immigrant Legal Resource Center, which provides legal training and advocates for the rights of immigrants, defines them as jurisdictions where police forces don't comply with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's direction to detain undocumented immigrants and turn them over to immigration enforcement officials.
In June, after 45 years as a Republican, Jones left the party, saying that, for the first time in his life, he could not support the party's candidate for president.
President-elect Trump has vowed to deport millions of immigrants in the country illegally. During his campaign, he also said he would withdraw federal funds from sanctuary cities.
Since the election, several major cities have vowed they will continue to uphold their sanctuary status. In New York City, Mayor Bill De Blasio has said he reminded Trump, who repeatedly proposed a ban on Muslim immigrants, that 900 New York City police officers are Muslim.
The Gazette-Mail ran a story Wednesday about a rally in support of turning Charleston into a "resettlement community." That effort referred to refugees legally placed here, while sanctuary cities, in contrast, benefit a separate group of people, undocumented immigrants. Several of the organizers working to bring refugees to Charleston said they had no comment on Jones' remarks, saying they are focused on refugees legally placed here, versus immigrants who are not here legally.
Jones said the city has no plans to become a sanctuary city "because we obey federal law and, even though I believe - I'm sure - there are undocumented folks that are here, we're not going to sanction it."
He also said he believes that major cities that have spoken out are jeopardizing federal funding.
"We're not on the radar screen, number one, to be a sanctuary city," he said. "We're not a big urban area. We're not near the border."
Kemi Bello, spokeswoman for the Immigrant Legal Resource Center, said the center tracks jurisdictions that don't comply with ICE detainers, which have been ruled unconstitutional by multiple federal courts across the country, and are aware of five statewide laws or policies, 365 county policies or ordinances, and about 37 city-level policies.
She noted that the term also has been used for jurisdictions with policies that guide against inquiring into immigration status, offer city services without respect to immigration status or decline to spend local resources assisting with immigration enforcement.
"We think it's safe to say that cutting federal funding from all those places would have a very large effect, with potentially drastic consequences to civil society, should so many hundreds of communities have local public safety budgets slashed," she said. "But it's not clear to me how the next administration would define 'sanctuary,' nor whether their actions towards these cities/counties would be legal.
"Policymakers in many of these jurisdictions may understandably be concerned that the next administration may try to coerce them into spending their own resources on federal immigration enforcement instead of prioritizing their own local responsibilities. There's simultaneously a danger of blurring the line between local and federal law enforcement such that immigrant communities will refuse to engage with local police or authorities in ways that will reduce public safety for everyone."
She said the center regularly advises law enforcement on the legal problems with ICE detainers, and they have seen success in communities that don't comply with the detainers.
"Their children are less likely to live in fear of losing a parent because of a traffic stop," she said.
Adrian Smith, a spokesman for ICE in the Philadelphia field office, said the Department of Homeland Security's current approach "focuses enforcement resources on convicted criminals and individuals who threaten public safety and national security, while also taking into account important community policing needs."
"With the implementation of the Priority Enforcement Program in July 2015, many law enforcement agencies, including some large jurisdictions, are now once again cooperating with ICE," he said.
The ICE website states that immigration officials now focus on "targeting individuals convicted of significant criminal offenses or who otherwise pose a threat to public safety."
Prior to July 2015, ICE would issue detainers when "an immigration officer had reason to believe the individual was removable," the website states.
Reach Erin Beck at erin.beck@wvgazettemail.com, 304-348-5163, acebook.com/erinbeckwv or follow @erinbeckwv on Twitter.