Political partisanship and misinformation has perverted the sanctuary city debate into one that paints undocumented immigrants as a pool of criminals enabled by apathetic police departments. Fueled by rabble-rousing media outlets, the vanguard against sanctuary cities was adopted by President Trump during his campaign and into his first 100 days as he signed an executive order that aimed to block federal funds for cities that refuse to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement.

As a response to the anti-sanctuary city sentiment from the White House, various blue states have taken their own measures to prepare for legal battles. Notably, California Governor Jerry Brown called upon California Congressman Xavier Becerra to occupy the empty state attorney general slot, vacated by Kamala Harris after her successful U.S. Senate campaign, to act as the shadow AG to Jeff Sessions. Becerra will strive to defend California’s large population of undocumented immigrants against any federal attempt to strip them of the sanctuary city protections. Within the golden state, the city of Los Angeles created a $10 million legal fund dedicated to undocumented immigrants who encounter legal issues with federal immigration enforcement.

But state action against sanctuary cities is also developing as the Texas state senate will look at a bill, SB 4, that allows law enforcement to ask for proof of citizenship or permanent residency during routine tasks like traffic stops. The bill passed the state House of Representatives and the changes await the Senate’s approval.

We have seen this before in Arizona when Then-Governor Jan Brewer signed SB 1070 into law in 2010. The bill required that law enforcement attempt to determine an individual’s immigration status during a lawful stop, detention, or arrest. However, a day before going into effect, a federal judge issued a preliminary injunction that blocked this provision. Understandably, the judge, along with Hispanic community in Arizona, was concerned that the bill would harvest a culture of racial profiling among Arizona law enforcement.

One must be concerned about the nature of Texas’ bill for the very same reason. Along with the point made earlier about the misdirection encumbering the sanctuary city debate, there is an element here going over the heads of the conservative Texas legislators and the people at the national level guiding the conversation. Yes, there have cases where violent undocumented immigrants commit another crime. The murder of Kate Steinle comes to mind. There is a very real conversation to be had about whether cities should cooperate with ICE when faced with violent undocumented immigrants.

But this fascination with blocking funding and turning police officers into immigration enforcers catalyzes an effect that contradicts a cornerstone of President Trump’s campaign: law enforcement communities. It is important to understand the problem sanctuary cities were supposed to mitigate. Currently, some believe that a city government has an ethical duty to protect their undocumented population from deportation threats. This argument has evolved as attempts to harden immigration standards intensify. Nevertheless, the original purpose was to build a strong trust between the undocumented population and local law enforcement. Here is where the national debate goes off the rail, neglecting the root of the topic.

It is the same logic employed against ruthless policing tactics. At a certain strong-arm tactic level, the trust between community and protectors diminishes. Before you know it, people begin to rely on alternative methods of reporting and protection thereby making public police departments obsolete. If every perceived undocumented immigrant was forced to show their documentation during any interaction with a police officer, they will become less likely to reach out to police to report crimes in their communities. Already in many jurisdictions including some in Texas, legal immigrant communities fear contact with police This makes the job of enforcing the law a whole lot harder. As Vox goes on to explain, this deterrence then makes undocumented populations susceptible to crime. Criminals will target these populations knowing that no retribution will come their way.

Sanctuary cities was policy aimed mainly at law enforcement. The objective was to make policing easier, safer, and trustworthy. President Trump and the state of Texas is threatening the core foundation that allows police officers to do their job. The Texas Major Cities Chiefs and the Texas Police Chiefs Association have already made their opposition to SB 4 public. According to the Migration Policy Institute, Texas houses 1.5 million undocumented immigration, second only to California. The Texas Police Chiefs recognize this reality and see a friendly cooperation as key for the safety of both community and police officer.

It is critical that this basic point is disseminated into our discourse pertaining to sanctuary cities. Otherwise, we are contributing to a policy mindset that will claim immigrants population and police officers as the victims.