Cities of Refuge: Immigration Enforcement, Police, and the Insurgent Genealogies of Citizenship in U.S. Sanctuary Cities
Why is this work in the frame?
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Full frame distilled prediction
Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
- Candidate categories
- none
- Consensus categories
- none
- Domain
- Candidate signal: noneConsensus signal: none
- Study design
- Candidate signal: ObservationalConsensus signal: Observational
- Genre
- Candidate signal: EmpiricalConsensus signal: Empirical
- Teacher disagreement score
- 0.206
- Threshold uncertainty score
- 0.988
- Validation status
machine_predicted_unvalidated·codex-gemma-dda1882f352a
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
- Teacher spread
- 0.234 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
- Validation status
score_only:v0-immature-baseline· verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it
Abstract
This paper explores two trajectories of law and politics that have sought to define the appropriate responsibilities municipal police should have for the enforcement of immigration law. The first section describes how the criminalization of migration has been entrenched into federal law over the past 20 years, opening space for the involvement of local police and other service providers in the practices associated with border control. The second section explores the history of municipal sanctuary policies. These local laws were first introduced in the 1980s to protect the rights of Central America refugees, and now place limitations on the use of local police or resources in the enforcement of immigration law. Focusing on San Francisco's City of Refuge Ordinance, this paper discusses the alternative visions of security and political membership that local actors seek to embed in these laws, and how they challenge the criminalization of migration.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
The record
- Venue
- Urban Geography
- Topic
- Migration, Refugees, and Integration
- Field
- Social Sciences
- Canadian institutions
- University of Toronto
- Funders
- not available
- Keywords
- CitizenshipImmigrationEnforcementLaw enforcementCriminologyPolitical sciencePolitical economySociologyLawPolitics
- Has abstract in OpenAlex
- yes