The Trump administration has put my town — the place my family and I call home — on its hit list for a thought crime.

What horrible thing have the people of Lawrence and wider Douglas County done to deserve this fate? Apparently, we don’t sufficiently detest immigrants.

Put questions of legal status aside. As we all know, it doesn’t matter to the hate-bloated buffoons in Washington, D.C., what papers a person has or doesn’t have. They will ship you off to a foreign gulag if you’re the wrong color or in the wrong place. Because Lawrence had the unmitigated audacity to care about people who look different, it has been threatened with the full wrath of the federal government.

It might be shocking, if so little was shocking these days.

The Department of Homeland Security posted a list of 500-plus “sanctuary jurisdictions” on its website May 29, highlighting cities and counties that supposedly run afoul of its anti-immigrant agenda. Three days later, officials took down the page after an outcry from local law enforcement. Thanks to the Internet Archive, you can still browse the list and read the government’s inflammatory rhetoric: “DHS demands that these jurisdictions immediately review and revise their policies to align with Federal immigration laws and renew their obligation to protect American citizens, not dangerous illegal aliens.”

There’s a lot to unpack there — immigrants commit fewer crimes than those born in the United States, for one thing — but let’s press on. The point is that my town and county landed on the list. Let’s try to figure out why.

Back in 2020, the city passed an ordinance protecting undocumented folks. Two years later, the Kansas Legislature pushed through a bill banning sanctuary cities, and Lawrence subsequently revised its ordinance. You can read the current city code here.

What’s important to note is that the current language gives wide berth to state and federal law, making clear that the city won’t obstruct or hinder federal immigration enforcement. By the same token, that doesn’t mean the city has to pursue a brazenly anti-immigration path. Lawrence can and should represent the will of voters, while following applicable law. And those voters, through their elected representatives, chose to make their city a welcoming one.

So how did Lawrence end up on the list? Apparently because it didn’t spew enough hatred for the White House’s liking.

A senior DHS official told NPR that “designation of a sanctuary jurisdiction is based on the evaluation of numerous factors, including self-identification as a sanctuary jurisdiction, noncompliance with federal law enforcement in enforcing immigration laws, restrictions on information sharing, and legal protections for illegal aliens.”

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem pontificated on Fox News: “Some of the cities have pushed back. They think because they don’t have one law or another on the books that they don’t qualify, but they do qualify. They are giving sanctuary to criminals.”

Note those phrases from the official and Noem: “Self-identification as a sanctuary jurisdiction.” “One law or another.”

In other words, it doesn’t matter what ordinances a city or county has on the books. It doesn’t matter what the actual laws may be. It apparently depends on what a city calls itself and how the Trump administration feels about it.

No city or county sets out to break the law. They have attorneys on staff or retainer to make sure they don’t break myriad legal restrictions. Lawrence followed the law in enacting its original ordinance, and when the law changed, officials followed along. But few want to step out and say such things publicly, given that federal officials have tremendous resources behind them. They could crush any city or county if they wished, through legal bills alone.

Thankfully, as mentioned above, sheriffs across the nation pushed back.

“This list was created without any input, criteria of compliance, or a mechanism for how to object to the designation,” said National Sheriffs’ Association president Sheriff Kieran Donahue. “Sheriffs nationwide have no way to know what they must do or not do to avoid this arbitrary label. This decision by DHS could create a vacuum of trust that may take years to overcome.”

Douglas County Sheriff Jay Armbrister was similarly outspoken in comments to the Lawrence Journal-World: “We feel like the goalposts have been moved on us, and this is now merely a subjective process where one person gets to decide our status on this list based on their opinion.”

Thanks to the U.S. Constitution and its First Amendment, we are not required to love, like or even respect our government. We are not required to voice support of its goals. We are not required to say anything that we don’t want to say about immigration, immigrants or ICE.

Republicans understood that full well when Presidents Joe Biden and Barack Obama were in office. Both faced torrents of criticism on this very subject.

Those presidents took the abuse. It was, and is, part of the job.

Now President Donald Trump and his anti-immigration minions have to deal with the fact that a different segment of the public vehemently disagrees with their immigration policies. That’s OK. That’s protected expression. Within the bounds of law, we are also free to define our towns, cities and counties however we want. Accusing local governments of thought crimes desecrates and defames our Constitution.

Clay Wirestone is Kansas Reflector opinion editor.

Through its opinion section, the Kansas Reflector works to amplify the voices of people who are affected by public policies or excluded from public debate. Find information, including how to submit your own commentary, here. Find how to submit your own commentary to The Lawrence Times here.

More Community Voices:

MORE …