Illustration by Mother Jones; Chepa Beltran/Sipa USA/AP, Richard Drew/AP

Donald Trump has He has promised to carry out the largest mass deportations in history during his second term, which would not only be cruel for the millions of people directly affected, but also disastrous for the country as a whole. Like my colleague Isabela Dias wrote earlier this year:

The country’s undocumented immigrants grow and harvest the food we eat, build our homes, and care for our young and old. They pay billion in taxes, create businesses that employ Americans and help rebuild following climate disasters.

Not only would Trump’s plan tear apart families and communities, it would also have devastating effects for years to come, including on American citizens who may have overlooked the importance of undocumented immigrants in their daily lives. Trump views immigration as an existential threat to the United States. He said immigrants are “taking our jobs,” are “not people” and “poisoning the blood of our country.” The reality is that if his plan were implemented, American life as we know it would be ruined, even for those who encourage mass deportation.

The Trump administration’s ability to implement these plans will be determined, in part, by the willingness of local authorities to cooperate with immigration authorities. Although states and cities cannot prevent the federal government from arresting and deporting people, they can slow them down by refusing to help. Many Democratic leaders across the country, often in areas that already have limited cooperation with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, responded to Trump’s victory by stepping up their commitment to their undocumented voters and further limiting the influx of local resources to the ICE.

Weeks after the election, the Los Angeles City Council unanimously passed an ordinance prohibiting the use of resources to assist in enforcing federal immigration laws; Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson says the city won’t “bend or break” under pressure from the administration, and will continue to restrict police collaboration with ICE; Denver Mayor Mike Johnston even said he was ready to go to prison to stop Trump’s mass deportations. “I’m ready to put him in jail,” replied Tom Homan, Trump’s border czar.

But a Democrat from the blue city, among the most prominent mayors in the world– took the opposite approach, cozying up to Trump on immigration and setting a worrying precedent for other sanctuary cities, who will face pressure from the new administration, including the threat of lose federal funds.

New York City Mayor Eric Adams, who is currently battling corruption and fraud charges in a federal corruption investigationhas already taken a significantly more adversarial approach to the Biden administration. Shortly after being indicted, Adams suggested, without evidence, that the the administration was targeting him for his criticism of Biden’s immigration policies. He has since largely avoided criticizing Trump, fueling speculation that he is seeking a pardon in his corruption case – as did a recent report. press conference in which Adams appeared to suggest that a “politicized” Justice Department had unfairly targeted him. Trump finally said On Monday, he considered pardoning the mayor, saying Adams “was treated pretty unfairly.”

When I asked Adams’ press office if the mayor was seeking a pardon from Donald Trump, they did not answer the question directly, but referred me to an interview earlier this month, the mayor said, “I didn’t do anything wrong. I have a great team of lawyers and any path to justice we will pursue.

New York City’s response to Trump’s mass deportation plan won’t just affect life in the city. more than 400,000 undocumented residentsbut potentially millions more in the region – and beyond, as other cities and towns look to New York, whose size and power make it a leading example of how cities can respond to the Trump administration. Unlike, say, California or Washington State, New York State law does not prevent local authorities from cooperating with immigration enforcement authorities – a cooperation that could also free up resources for ICE to arrest and deport more people across the country.

Adams has repeatedly called on the City Council — which passed laws in 2014 limiting police cooperation with immigration authorities unless a person is convicted of a serious crime — to reverse those restrictions. In February, Adams told the press that he opposed New York’s current sanctuary law; Advocates said a rollback would deprive people of due process protections, allowing eviction without conviction, and the council rejected the effort. “The mayor has now made it clear that he wants to gut our detention laws…and exile people based on where they were born,” Rosa Cohen-Cruz of the nonprofit legal advocacy organization said at the time The Bronx Defenders. Adams’ press office pointed me to the mayor’s previous comments about targeting those who commit crimes, but did not directly answer questions about whether repealing sanctuary laws would lead to expulsions without conviction. Current laws already allow people convicted of serious crimes like homicide and rape to be handed over to immigration officials who obtain a court warrant.

Recently, Adams said his team was exploring whether he could change the city’s sanctuary laws through executive orders. In a CBS New York In the interview, Adams said the council “has stated that they are not willing to change the sanctuary city law. I think they are wrong. My teams review my power as decrees. Following a meeting with Adams last week, Trump’s new border czar, Tom Homan, told the New York Post that Adams wants to reopen the ICE office at the Rikers Island jail, which was closed by the City Council in 2014, perhaps through an executive order.

Democratic Councilor Lincoln Restler of Brooklyn told the Job that legal challenges should be expected if Adams attempts to implement his plan – and that “it is clear that Mayor Adams is more interested in obtaining a pardon… than in protecting New York’s immigrant and enforcing our sanctuary city laws.”

At the same press conference earlier this month Adams used to suggest his indictment was politically motivated, he was asked whether a migrant accused but not convicted of a crime was a criminal – being given that he himself is facing charges.

“Americans have certain rights,” Adams responded. “The Constitution is for Americans. I am not a person who infiltrated this country.

Of course, that’s not true: The Constitution guarantees due process to everyone in the United States, regardless of their immigration status. Adams walked back those comments after receiving pushback, acknowledging to New York Public Radio that the Constitution is for everyone…”even for undocumented immigrants.”

It’s unclear whether a mayor accused of crimes, but not yet convicted, will be able to roll back due process protections for undocumented immigrants in a similar situation. But if Adams succeeds — especially if he also receives a pardon — it will set a dangerous precedent that other cities can follow as pressure from the Trump administration mounts.