Let’s keep this FReepathon moving and wrap it up, Folks!
Posted on 11/27/2019 11:37:00 AM PST by jazusamo
A national crisis generated by local law enforcement agencies offering even the most violent illegal immigrants sanctuary is driving federal officials to resort to desperate measures. Under a local-federal partnership known as 287(g), Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is notified of jail inmates in the country illegally so that they can be deported after serving time for state crimes. Unfortunately, a growing number of local law enforcement agencies are instead releasing the illegal aliens—many with serious convictions such as child sex offenses, rape and murder—rather than turn them over to federal authorities for removal. Judicial Watch has reported on this extensively and just a few weeks ago outed yet another elected law enforcement official who freed a child sex offender and forbids his department from honoring ICE detainers.
Now ICE is trying to strike preemptively by publicly disclosing convicts , complete with mug shots, scheduled to be released before they are actually let go by police in municipalities that proudly offer illegal aliens sanctuary. It indicates that the federal agency is determined to do its job amid a growing wave of local resistance. This month ICE targeted six offenders incarcerated in two Maryland counties notorious for shielding illegal immigrants from the feds. These are no boy scouts and ICE is pleading with authorities in Montgomery and Prince George’s counties to hand over the prisoners instead of freeing them into the community. Most are incarcerated for sexual crimes involving children, including rape and serious physical abuse that resulted in death. A couple of the offenders are in jail for murder and assault and ICE wants them all transferred to its custody, so the illegal aliens don’t reoffend.
“The county leadership has chosen misguided politics over public safety,” said ICE’s Baltimore office director, Francisco Madrigal, in the statement announcing the upcoming scheduled releases. “The individuals we have lodged detainers against have been arrested in the community and will likely be released directly back into that community under these dangerous policies. We aren’t asking Montgomery County or Prince George’s County to conduct immigration enforcement, we’re asking them to honor a lawful request to transfer these individuals into our custody where they can avail themselves of due process in the immigration court system.” Judicial Watch reached out to law enforcement officials in both Maryland sanctuary counties, but calls went unanswered. ICE reminds them that when local jurisdictions refuse to cooperate with immigration enforcement, they betray their duty to protect public safety.
Besides Montgomery and Prince George’s counties, two other large Maryland jurisdictions—Baltimore County and the city of Baltimore—shield illegal immigrants from the feds and deportation. Maryland’s Attorney General, the state’s chief law enforcement official, issued a legal memo last year defending the practice. Complying with ICE detainers for criminal illegal aliens is voluntary, the Attorney General writes in the document, and state and local law enforcement officials are potentially exposed to liability if they hold someone beyond the release date determined by state law. In 2017, Baltimore’s Chief Deputy State’s Attorney instructed prosecutors to think twice before charging illegal immigrants with minor, non-violent crimes to shield them from Trump administration deportation efforts.
North Carolina is another state well known for releasing droves of illegal immigrant criminals back onto the streets after being jailed for serious state crimes. This fiscal year alone, nearly 500 offenders with ICE detainers were freed throughout the Tar Heel State. Just weeks before the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) disclosed those disturbing statewide figures, Judicial Watch reported that the elected sheriff of North Carolina’s largest county, Mecklenburg, released numerous violent offenders rather than turn them over to federal authorities for removal. Among them was a previously deported Honduran (33-year-old Oscar Pacheco-Leonardo) charged with rape and child sex offenses. Throughout his campaign, Mecklenburg‘s sheriff, Garry McFadden, promised to protect illegal immigrants and as soon as he got elected in 2018 he ended the program that notified ICE of jail inmates in the country illegally.
So locals are defying the feds and releasing dangerous criminals on the streets. It seems like an easy fix if you ask me. It starts with the concept of fear being a great motivator.
It’s always easier to release felons when you go home at the end of the day to your gated community.
Releasing them requires more government, a motive of the left.
Gated community..
Right.
Sanctuaries to Release Illegal Immigrants Jailed for Rape, Murder, Child Molestation (with tattooed bar codes for easy processing)
I was more inclined to recommend bulleyes on their foreheads as well but..
WE are a kinder and gentler people than that... No 8-?
Cutting federal funding to all sanctuaries would be a good start too.
It is why 2020’s General is so important. (Where have ya heard that before?)
Innocent people will be victims of this irresponsible behavior.
When will people wake up and demand “law and order” as the old Silent Majority did?
Bump!!
Kate Steinle was someone else’s daughter. Amy Bhiel’s parents forgave her killers. As long as you have close to 50% of the people who are busy with their own lives this stuff doesn’t’t matter.
You can bet your bippy if the illegals were targeting the local politicians families instead of the families without armed guards sanctuary cities and states would be a thing of the past.
Yep, a high percentage of liberals don’t give a whit until it affects them and some of those are so far gone they don’t care.
Let’s keep this FReepathon moving and wrap it up, Folks!
Sooner or later, a family of six is going to be wiped out because of this insanity and people will be forced to understand what’s acceptable.
Sooner or later, a family of six is going to be wiped out because of this insanity and people will be forced to understand what’s acceptable.
= = = = = = = = = = =
Don’t really mean to be cynical BUT it will take a family of 6 that is DIRECTLY the family of a National POL, Judge etc, something that can’t be ‘held’ only in the Daily Blab.
Localities should be left to be the laboratories of democracy. If localities want to have policies that are patently foolish, they should be free to do it. As local as possible is the best level to decide things like this. Decentralized power is the necessary firewall.
“Localities should be left to be the laboratories of democracy. If localities want to have policies that are patently foolish...Etc.”
Well, not a democracy, a Republic. Governed by laws not mobs or even local elected mobs.
Streets and sanitation and zoning are local responsibilities, and if a local community does something that harms a neighboring community like diverting a river or tearing up another community’s road that town or city can be held responsible, usually through a lawsuit to make whole with a claim for damages.
Immigration policy is a federal responsibility aimed at protecting all communities. Cities should not get to decide locally who has a right to remain in the United States. Experience damage as a result of a sanctuary city ignoring federal law? The locality in which an illegal commits a crime should start charging the releasing sanctuary city politicians as criminal accessories. It might not result in any convictions but it might make the point.
A very important concept, but one that deserves context. Under the current lamentable status if given the question of more government vs. less government, or the often similar choice of more centralized government vs. less centralized government, in most random circumstances the choices or less and/or less centralized government would be the proper direction for change. But not all questions are random. Circumstances meriting different answers exist.
On the spectrum from pure anarchy to absolute tyranny the Founding Fathers, most Freepers and still many Americans (although probably not as many as we'd prefer) choose to be closer to the anarchy end of that spectrum than where most people have lived throughout history. But they didn't choose anarchy. That doesn't work for any society much larger than Robinson Crusoe's. Moreover, the Founding Fathers provided us with an important, but often forgotten experiment on the limits of limited, decentralized, government: The Articles of Confederation. That was failing in spite of the best efforts of our great founding generation. In its place the Framers gave us a federal republic as a system under which the people were sovereign. With a small (but more than under the Articles) government whose powers were carefully and appropriately distributed across multiple, potential competing, levels and branches. Yes, they wanted to allow for local innovation and for new, good ideas to spread but some functions deserved to be in certain places and anarchic, unlimited experimentation wasn't intended.
Our freedom's decline lies not just in increased government and increased centralization thereof, but in shifting governmental functions outside the original scheme. Shifts to too high or too low levels are both problematic. Management of major crime was to be mostly a state level function. Federal law has certainly usurped too much of that. The state might divide that power throughout multiple jurisdictions, but if one of those jurisdictions was having trouble maintaining law and order the state could supplement or even supersede it. Local officials attempting to block appropriate state powers, outside their intended domain, were deemed corrupt and were subject to the full range of state intervention. Successful innovators on subjects within their local domain could be promoted to higher levels by the local electorate to dabble in higher level matters as their representative. But on measures belonging at the state level localities got no more than the share of their representative vote's control. They couldn't unilaterally declare themselves beyond the reach of the state tax code, state murder statues, etc.
The Framers placed control over who could enter the country as a whole, and citizenship therein, at the Federal level. This makes sense. Free choice of citizens on in which state they'd lived and free trade within the various states was important and encouraged innovation. If Tennessee's government policies didn't work as well as Kentucky's folks could vote with their feet costing Tennessee population, tax base and power. But if Tennessee (initially a border state) would let any old "riff raff" in as Tennessee citizens, then the above implied Georgia would have to accept any of those "riff raff" who chose to move from outside the country, through Tennessee, to Georgia. Instead Tennessee could plead its case at the Federal legislature that such weren't really "riff raff" but worthy proto-Americans, but would have to convince enough other states before they could win admittance to the country as a whole. Want to shift functions to different places than the original scheme? There are mechanisms to change the scheme, with the consent of all concerned (or at least a supermajority thereof) through amendments to the formal "schemes," aka Constitutions, of the Federal and various state levels. But, by itself, Dodge City doesn't get to set all the policy for Kansas as a whole, nor for St. Louis, all of Missouri nor for the country as a whole.
These liberal/'progressive' sanctuary cities/states are blocking laws and making decisions that constitutionally belong at higher level of governments. They are corrupt choices amounting to insurrection. The Constitution, as legally amended, contains a remedy in Amendment 14, Section III. In contrast, conservative sanctuary cities, etc. against gun grabbers are defending the supreme law of the 2nd amendment against unconstitutional usurpers in the intermediate levels of government. They are not the same thing in spite of the progressive's exhortations.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.