Connect with us

Economics

Is New York rethinking its sanctuary-city status?

Published

on

Listen to this story.
Enjoy more audio and podcasts on iOS or Android.

Your browser does not support the <audio> element.

IN MANY PLACES it can take decades, if not generations, to be deemed a local. But as soon as anyone sets foot in the Big Apple, they are New Yorkers, regardless of immigration status or bagel preference. Eric Adams, though, New York’s mayor, has called for a change in the sanctuary-city law. This has triggered a debate on sanctuary cities and worry among immigrant groups. What is a sanctuary city and why is Mr Adams rethinking the policy?

Broadly, sanctuary cities (some 200 cities, counties and states) limit co-operation with immigration authorities: partly through laws and executive orders, but mainly based on the will of local people and the local government. When New York City became a sanctuary city in 1989, it was less an immigration policy and more a public-safety one. The then mayor, Ed Koch, wanted to encourage irregular migrants to co-operate with police when they were victims of a crime or witness to one. In return, their status would not be shared with the federal government. Those arrested were not necessarily handed over to immigration authorities.

Koch’s successors all abided by similar orders. Rudy Giuliani, a Republican who later served as Donald Trump’s lawyer, once said to illicit immigrants, “You’re one of the people who we want in this city. You’re somebody that we want to protect.” In 1996 he sued the federal government to stop city workers from turning over information about unlawful migrants in New York to immigration officials. In 2014 and in 2018 Bill de Blasio implemented measures further limiting co-operation. Police no longer honoured federal requests to detain people. Mr de Blasio evicted immigration officers from city jails. The law allows for exemptions, such as people with recent convictions for certain violent crimes and those on the terrorism watch list. Judicial warrants are obeyed.

Sanctuary cities have “become the litmus test of the attitudes of local jurisdictions toward immigration”, says Muzaffar Chishti of the Migration Policy Institute, a think-tank. The term has become politicised and gets weaponised. Some seem to think immigrants are being hidden from law enforcement in the basements of city halls. After becoming president in 2017 Donald Trump tried to withhold federal funding from sanctuary cities (President Joe Biden later rescinded that order). The strong-arming galvanised Democratic leaders into further protecting their sanctuary cities. But now some may be wavering.

Last year some Chicago lawmakers questioned its sanctuary status, but a move to put a referendum on the ballot was voted down. A few high-profile incidents involving recently arrived asylum-seekers, including the shooting of a tourist in Times Square, appear to have shaken Mr Adams’s resolve. “We need to modify the sanctuary-city law,” he said at a recent town-hall meeting. “If you commit a felony, a violent act, we should be able to turn you over to ICE [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] and have you deported.”

Some fear his comments will lead to mistrust and violence. “He’s intentionally misleading New Yorkers about the impact of immigrants,” says Marlene Galaz of the New York Immigration Coalition, an advocacy group. She says he is also misleading New Yorkers about what sanctuary cities are: the laws protect not just those who have been there for three hours, but also people who have been there for three decades. Some sanctuary-city opponents argue that immigrants increase crime. But new research from Stanford University suggests otherwise. Since 1880 immigrants have not been more likely to be jailed than people born in America. Indeed, immigrants are 30% less likely to be incarcerated than white people born in America and 60% less likely than black Americans.

Since the mayor’s remarks there has been no change in policy. The city-council speaker has no plans to change the laws. But there has been a political impact. Troy Nehls, a Republican congressman from Texas, tweeted that “Democrats don’t even want to live under their policies.” The scheme to bus migrants from border towns to sanctuary cities has been effective. Mr Chishti says that Greg Abbott, the governor of Texas, “has not only weaponised this issue for his own party, but he has changed the politics of the other party as well.”

Stay on top of American politics with The US in brief, our daily newsletter with fast analysis of the most important electoral stories, and Checks and Balance, a weekly note from our Lexington columnist that examines the state of American democracy and the issues that matter to voters.

Economics

UK Has a New Prime Minister Without a General Election

Published

on

UK Has a New Prime Minister Without a General Election

On July 20, Andy Burnham has been chosen to be the next Prime Minister in UK. The appointment of a new Prime Minister in the United Kingdom often raises questions from people outside the country, especially when no nationwide election has taken place. Many wonder how a new national leader can assume office without voters casting ballots. The answer lies in the UK’s parliamentary system, where the Prime Minister is not directly elected by the public but is instead chosen based on who commands the confidence of the House of Commons.

How the UK Selects Its Prime Minister

Unlike presidential systems where citizens vote directly for the head of government, the United Kingdom elects Members of Parliament (MPs) during a general election. The political party that secures a majority of seats in the House of Commons usually forms the government, and that party selects its own leader to serve as Prime Minister.

If the leader resigns, becomes unable to continue, or is replaced by their party, the governing party can choose a new leader without triggering a general election. As long as the new leader is able to maintain the confidence of Parliament, they can immediately become Prime Minister after being formally appointed by the monarch.

Why No Election Was Required

A general election is not automatically required every time the office of Prime Minister changes hands. The governing party retains its parliamentary majority because voters elected MPs rather than an individual Prime Minister. If the ruling party chooses a new leader through its internal leadership process, the government continues to operate without interruption.

This constitutional arrangement provides stability and allows the government to continue functioning during periods of political transition. It also avoids the expense and disruption of holding a nationwide election every time party leadership changes.

The King’s Constitutional Role

After a governing party elects a new leader, the monarch invites that individual to form a government. This constitutional step is largely ceremonial and follows long-established conventions. The King appoints the person most likely to command a majority in the House of Commons, ensuring continuity of government.

Although the monarch formally appoints the Prime Minister, political power rests with Parliament and the elected representatives of the British people.

Could an Election Still Happen?

Yes. A newly appointed Prime Minister has the authority to request a general election if they believe it is politically advantageous or if they seek a stronger public mandate. Parliament can also reach a point where a government loses the confidence of the House of Commons, potentially leading to an election or the formation of a new government.

In many cases, however, a new Prime Minister continues governing until the next scheduled general election.

What This Means for the UK

The UK’s parliamentary democracy is designed to ensure government continuity while respecting the results of the most recent general election. Leadership changes within the governing party do not automatically alter the composition of Parliament, which is why a new Prime Minister can take office without another nationwide vote.

Understanding this process helps explain why political transitions in the United Kingdom can appear different from those in countries with presidential systems. While the Prime Minister may change, the democratic mandate of Parliament remains in place until voters elect a new House of Commons at the next general election.

Continue Reading

Economics

Global Grid Upgrades Reshape Macro Economics

Published

on

Global grid upgrades reshape macro economics

On July 21, 2026, global economic analysis shifts focus toward a defining structural macroeconomic trend: the massive expansion of public and private capital deployment into high-capacity electrical grid infrastructure. As industrial electrification, automated data center hubs, and renewable energy integration accelerate worldwide, sovereign governments and institutional investors are facing a monumental economic challenge. Updating legacy power grids to meet skyrocketing demand has emerged as a primary driver of long-term capital expenditures and industrial productivity across both developed and emerging market economies.

According to international economic policy updates released this week, grid infrastructure investments are projected to exceed multi-trillion-dollar thresholds over the coming decade. Economic planners caution that without modernized, high-voltage transmission networks, regional manufacturing sectors face severe energy bottlenecks, localized power price volatility, and operational constraints. Consequently, infrastructure spending is rapidly transitioning from passive utility maintenance into a vital component of national economic competitiveness and industrial policy.

The macroeconomic ripple effects of this capital deployment are being felt across global commodity markets and labor networks. High demand for structural industrial inputs—such as copper, aluminum, specialized electrical steel, and high-capacity transformers—has created sustained pricing support for critical material producers. Simultaneously, the specialized technical labor required to manufacture and deploy modern grid hardware is driving wage growth in industrial sectors, adding a complex new layer to central bank disinflation trajectories.

For global policymakers and strategic investors, the economics of energy grid modernization represent a double-edged sword. While massive infrastructure investment boosts short-term gross domestic product (GDP) and strengthens domestic industrial foundations, it requires disciplined fiscal allocation to prevent inflationary crowding-out of private capital. Countries that efficiently streamline grid infrastructure permitting and mobilize private investment will secure lower long-term energy costs, attracting high-tech manufacturing and reinforcing sustainable economic growth.

Continue Reading

Economics

Global Trade Realignment and Supply Chains in 2026

Published

on

Global Trade Realignment and Supply Chains in 2026

The international trade architecture entering the second half of 2026 is undergoing a profound structural pivot. As major sovereign economic blocs adjust to the long-term impact of unilateral tariffs and escalating regional subsidies, traditional globalized supply chains are being rapidly replaced by bilateral trade corridors and regional alliance networks. Data released in late July 2026 highlights a significant divergence: while cross-continental freight volumes between non-aligned partners have cooled, intra-regional trade throughout North America, Southeast Asia, and Eastern Europe has surged to record levels. This shift reflects a broader macroeconomic strategy wherein multinational corporations prioritize geopolitical resilience over pure cost minimization.

The primary economic catalyst behind this regionalization is the proliferation of sector-specific tariffs targeting critical industries, notably battery components, clean energy technology, and advanced semiconductor hardware. In response, global manufacturers have adopted multi-tier sourcing models that distribute production across intermediate partner nations before final assembly. While this strategy successfully bypasses primary import duties, it adds structural layers of logistical complexity and administrative oversight. Economists note that while total output remains robust, aggregate production costs have drifted upward, contributing to persistent baseline inflation across major consumer markets.

Simultaneously, currency settlement patterns within these regional blocs are experiencing a notable transformation. Sovereign central banks and commercial institutions are increasingly utilizing localized currency swap lines and digital clearing mechanisms to settle cross-border trade transactions. This transition reduces direct exposure to foreign exchange volatility and mitigates third-party liquidity constraints, further solidifying regional economic cohesion. However, for developing economies situated outside these primary trading alliances, the tightening of international trade networks presents severe challenges, restricting access to key export markets and foreign direct investment.

For corporate strategists and policy analysts navigating late 2026, success requires a thorough understanding of these emerging trade corridors. Organizations must conduct regular risk assessments of their multi-tier supplier networks, model tariff sensitivities under shifting geopolitical scenarios, and invest in real-time supply chain telemetry. As regional economic blocs strengthen their regulatory borders, supply chain agility and compliance fortitude will distinguish market leaders from vulnerable enterprises in the evolving global economy.

Continue Reading

Trending