Recently, an illegal immigrant in Stamford, CT, a sanctuary city, allegedly raped a three-year-old girl; one state over, the grief-stricken families of teenage girls who were killed with machetes and baseball bats finally saw their illegal immigrant murderers indicted.
Ten of the 15 arrested were in the country illegally. Against this backdrop, a group of non-compliant sanctuary city “law-unenforcement” executives signed a letter calling those who wish to enforce already existing immigration law “extremists.”
That is a great political statement straight from the Democrat Party talking points, but as far as a public safety policy statement it is flawed on several fronts.
Let’s put the talking points away and have a serious discussion.
The letter, addressed to the U.S. Senate, was a response to President Trump’s January executive order threatening to withhold federal funds to those sanctuary cities that refused to comply with federal immigration law. Oh, and it does add a request of their own: they still want the federal funds. I was taught at a young age that you can’t have your cake and eat it too. That applies here.
To be clear, what is being asked of police is no more than to hold illegal aliens if they commit crimes or are subject to deportation until Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials can take custody of the criminal illegal alien.Why is that so extreme?
As if they thought no one would notice the glaring inconsistency, the letter opens by repeating their commitment to the safety of the communities they serve. It’s quite an impressive amount of gall for these letter-signers to cite public safety as they give a hearty welcome to illegal immigrants; savage criminality and dangerous pasts a plus.
The claim by these executives that holding arrested or convicted criminal illegal aliens will hurt community policing efforts in Latino communities is nothing more than an emotional and anecdotal claim with no substantiation. (Plus, they don’t offer any empirical data to support their claim.)
It hurts police-community trust when people cannot be protected by police.
This hypocrisy and disrespect for the law would be almost comical if the stories I’ve recounted here weren’t common occurrences. That three-year-old would not be raped, if it weren’t for the illegal continuance of sanctuary cities.
The true meaning of sanctuary is found in our law itself; in it we can all have rest that we are self-governed, and we can trust our law enforcement executives to fulfill their duty and uphold what the people expect of them.
Read the rest at The Hill by clicking here.