Monday, February 6, 2017
sanctuary cities
By Florida Bill
A few days ago, President Trump put his pen where his mouth has been for the last 20 months and signed an ordered to withhold federal funds from the so-called "Sanctuary Cities" which have declined to enforce federal law dealing with undocumented immigrants.
His executive order triggered declarations from mayors of big city recipients who in essence said the "heck with the money." Their municipalities will be standing firm in their refusal to enforce federal law deemed unfair to illegal immigrants whom they apparently feel deserve the right to "pursue the American dream," even when committing crimes in their illegally attained new homes.
For New York and Chicago, billions of dollars are on the table. It is hard to imagine such recalcitrance by city officials whose urban territories are heavy with recipients of welfare and whose budgets are already in deep trouble, despite federal subsidies.
In sanctuary cities, police will arrest and prosecute illegal aliens for crimes, but will not advise federal authorities that the perpetrator is subject to deportation for breaking federal law by sneaking into the country. In other situations, when individuals are deported on federal order, they often return and take up residence in a sanctuary city, where they need not fear getting sent back again. Too often they commit other criminal offenses.
In recent months and years, there have been publicized incidents of crimes committed by illegal aliens who have been protected in their sanctuary from federal arrest and deportation. A senate committee has released statistics showing that in a four year span, 121 killings were carried out by convicted immigrants who were not deported, but should have been.
Most notorious was the fatal shooting of 32-year-old Kate Steinle in July, 2015, in San Francisco by an illegal alien who had been deported five times by federal authorities. After each deportation, the murderer of Ms. Steinle had returned to his San Francisco home, where he remained secure from interference by immigration authorities.
In the United States, there are 364 counties and 39 cities, including New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Baltimore and San Francisco, which are sanctuaries, allowing criminal aliens protection from deportation by federal authorities. Such credentials as a sanctuary city are established by local or state law (de jure), or by performance (de facto).
The President's new Attorney General, Jeff Sessions, is in sync with President Trump on this issue, and it is anticipated that the Department of Justice under him will turn up the heat on the cities and counties which thumb their noses at federal immigration statutes.
If the President prevails with this executive order, which is being challenged in the courts, the sanctuary cities and boroughs will lose huge amounts of revenue which they receive by way of grants and through other federal programs. In New York, for example, the big Apple would be deprived of an estimated $10 billion dollars a year.
For New York, the nation's largest city, Mayor Bill de Blasio has pledged that his city would remain a sanctuary for the estimated 500,000 undocumented immigrants residing in its five boroughs. He won't be coerced by Mr. Trump, he vows.
"We're gonna stay a sanctuary city," asserted Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel. He added, in a news conference interview, that "we welcome people, whether you're from Poland or Pakistan...Ireland, India or Israel...Mexico or Moldova... you are welcome in Chicago as you pursue the American Dream."
Critics are charging that the out-of-control gun violence in Chicago is connected with its illegal immigration problem. Aside from the sanctuary city question, President Trump has threatened that if Emanuel does not address and fix the gun problem in which thousands are being killed each year, he will send federal troops into the Windy city to get the job done. The question of freezing federal funds for sanctuary cities which ignore federal law will ultimately be decided in the courts. Proponents of the sanctuaries argue that the states and cities have no obligation to enforce federal laws...enforcement being the job of the federal government. Yet they expect the federal government to continue to subsidize them with revenues drawn from federal taxes and authorized by federal statutes.
The concept of a sanctuary city actually goes back thousands of years though which perpetrators of violence have sought asylum and avoidance of blood vengeance as allowed by law. In some cases, churches in medieval England were set up as sanctuaries by royal charter.
In the USA, the hot button issue of sanctuary cities first arose in presidential politics in 2008 in the Republican race for the nomination. At that time Colorado Republican Tom Tancredo ran on an anti-illegal immigration platform, specifically attacking sanctuary cities.
XXX
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment