Sanctuary Cities

From The Washington Times comes news that might be upsetting to supporters of SB 1070, but which will shock no one who’s been attentively following this public debate for the past few weeks.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/jul/14/justice-sanctuary-cities-are-no-arizona/

The double standards exhibited by Mr. Holder and President Obama are hardly surprising. Neither is the logically incoherent rationale for pursuing this two-tiered policy, which-like almost every other Obama administration immigration stance-is designed, first and foremost, with political considerations in mind.

The ostensible rationale for sanctuary city laws is that local police departments need the cooperation of communities where many members are illegal aliens in order to prosecute crimes that they consider more serious in nature, e.g. rape, robbery and assault, home invasion, grand larceny, etc…

An illustration of this principle in practice can be found in my own backyard, New York City.

http://www.gothamgazette.com/print/535

Until Order 34, every mayor since Ed Koch had followed a “don’t tell” policy and didn’t cooperate with the federal immigration agency. In 1996, Congress passed a law that said the city cannot forbid city workers from voluntarily reporting illegal aliens. Mayor Rudy Giuliani resisted but lost when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the federal law and ruled in 1999 that Koch’s policy was illegal.

Though similar to Koch’s order, city officials said, Order 41 does not violate federal law since it follows guidelines from the 1999 ruling by making confidential a larger class of information — for example income tax records, sexual orientation, status as a victim of domestic violence — not just immigration status.

What occurred is this: an executive order that immunized illegal aliens from possible referral to the INS was replaced with one that brought New York City into compliance with a federal immigration law that allowed municipal workers to voluntarily disclose to the federal government the immigration status of aliens living here illegally. The predictable uproar from “immigrants rights” groups, the City Council and the ACLU ensued, and the new law was swiftly replaced with a weaker executive order that essentially reaffirmed the Koch era status quo ante.

The problem with this, other than the fact that it cleverly flouts the intentions of both a standing court order and the 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Responsibility Act, is that it is not even successful in achieving its desired ends. As described earlier in this post, the purported motivation behind these edicts was to entice members of largely immigrant communities-but especially those people who are in this country illegally-to cooperate with police and social services departments that they might otherwise be reluctant to interact with under exigent circumstances. However, what actually occurs is that these laws act as insulation for criminals who are illegal aliens-and prey on the general public-and ones who attack other illegal aliens whom are theoretically the intended beneficiaries of those very laws.

Think about this logically for a moment. Why would the “bad” illegal aliens living here, e.g. those that are Salva Maratruchas, or potential terrorists, feel any less safe because of these sanctuary city laws than the “good” illegal aliens who are merely victims of chance misfortune or recidivist criminals? Why would these laws not similarly protect individuals who pose a threat to public safety, who would presumably enjoy the same freedom of movement and contact as their less threatening, yet undocumented, brethren?

Unfortunately, these are longer merely hypothetical questions.

http://www.alipac.us/ftopict-152698.html

Anthony Bologna, 48, and his sons Michael, 20, and Matthew, 16, were returning from a picnic when they were gunned down on June 16, allegedly by Salvadoran national Edwin Ramos, 22.

The case prompted public outcry after it emerged that Ramos was convicted of two gang-related felonies when he was 17, but local officials did not contact federal agencies to determine his immigration status.

The Bologna family filed a lawsuit Tuesday alleging that the city’s sanctuary policy shielding illegal immigrants from questions about their citizenship status — even those charged with a crime — was to blame, KCBS San Francisco reported.

“The city adopted and enforced a policy that was actually inconsistent with and prohibited by federal law,” Bologna family attorney Michael Kelly was quoted as saying…

Advertisements
Posted in BICE, Crime, New York City, San Francisco, Uncategorized | Tagged | Leave a comment

Being Lucky and Being Right

A pretty astute analysis of  Arizona gubernatorial politics, and how one decision changed the political landscape of an entire state. From WaPo:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/governors/how-jan-brewer-won.html?wprss=thefix

Posted in Arizona, Barack Obama, politicians, SB1070 | Tagged | Leave a comment

Oz

One thing I hope to accomplish with this blog-despite its admittedly modest ambitions-is to broaden the debate about immigration, which is indeed a global, not a national, or even regional, problem. Of course, many of the same forces that are attempting to politically and culturally reshape this country, e.g. the current political establishment, religious or quasi-religious institutions, the mass media, immigration attorneys, politically engaged ethnic lobbies, among others, are also at work in other Western nations that are experiencing an immigration crisis.

Perhaps the closest analogue to the United States is its traditional ally Australia, which does not share a land border with any reliable source of emigration, obviously, but which has recently been subjected to a prolonged,  peaceful invasion of boat people hailing from various global hot spots, e.g. Sri Lanka, Afghanistan, certain parts of Southeast Asia, reminiscent of The Camp of The Saints. It can be plausibly argued that the previous Australian government’s failure to adequately address this issue lead to the ultimate defeat of Prime Minister John Howard, and the election of his rival, Labor leader Kevin Rudd. Interestingly enough, Mr. Rudd has now been replaced by a woman who’s experiencing her own political birth pangs as a result of Australia’s inability to address the problem of distraught refugees arriving to its shores by boat.

After attempting to farm out its border policing duties to various neighboring locales, e.g. Indonesia, East Timor, perhaps Nauru now that its president has generously proffered his services, Australia now finds itself in the tricky situation of deciding what to do with thousands of guests who were not invited, and whose lifestyles Australians don’t wish to subsidize for the ensuing several decades. If the governing party in the country were honest, it would state the facts plainly and honestly-as delineated above-but instead, its leader has decided to engage the public in another pointless “conversation,” which, like most conversations on this subject, will undoubtedly be one-sided and aggravating to people who blanche at being labeled “racists” for expressing commonly held political opinions.

Thank goodness for whistleblowers!

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/07/14/2953714.htm?section=justin

Opposition immigration spokesman Scott Morrison says Senator Evans’ comments are a remarkable admission of failure.

“It says that he thinks his job is to try and re-educate Australians who disagree with his view,” he said.

“But it also says that the Government thinks that it’s just a message, that it’s not about policy.

Does that sound familiar? It should, because that’s essentially been the strategy of their American counterparts, the Democratic Party, President Obama-and his predecessor in office, President Bush-as well as most of the political cognoscenti who routinely bestow their enlightened opinions about this subject upon us, for the past four years. If only the ignorant, bigoted, parochial peasants would listen! Then perhaps all of our problems would be solved. Not the problems of welfare subsistence among new “political refugees,” or the increased criminality of newcomers who were not properly vetted, or the increased taxation required to integrate these people into the existing welfare state, or any of the other assorted problems that arise from unfettered immigration. But it would allow all of these selfless public servants-whose reputations have been irreparably tarnished during this debacle-to take a breather, and isn’t that what really matters?

Posted in asylum, Australia, boat people, Immigration | Tagged | Leave a comment

Dogma

It turns out that one of the nation’s fastest-dwindling Christian denominations has taken a predictably doctrinaire position on the hot-button issue of SB 1070.

http://faith.courier-journal.com/2010/07/church-boycotts-arizona-meetings.html

While the stance of the Presbyterian Church in this political conflict isn’t that surprising, it’s disturbing nonetheless to see an almost unified front among purportedly religious institutions in the debate over Arizona’s recently enacted legislation. Not only are traditionally liberal, mainline Protestant denominations inveighing against SB 1070, but even the Southern Baptist Convention under President Richard Land-who likes to posture as a movement conservative-has come out in support of a full-fledged program of amnesty. Something tells me that he too is not a fan of Governor Jan Brewer, which is fine.

I simply take issue with  religious figures, particularly those in my own Catholic Church, who present themselves as representatives of the Lord while endorsing a platform that seems to contravene some pretty basic biblical teachings of the New Testament. Now, I’m not an exegete per se, and don’t even pretend to be a particularly devout Roman Catholic, but one of the things I was taught growing up is to respect our man-made laws, one of which is a prohibition on entering this country without permission. This tenet is one that our Lord and Savior-and I apologize to those readers who are not Christian or theist, but for the sake of this argument I’ll be addressing the leaders of these churches-sermonized on at some length.

Somehow, this touchstone has been lost in the theological debate over how we should deal with people who remain here illegally with impunity, e.g. Elvira Arellano, the Mexican woman who used a Chicago area church as her base of operations as she launched a widely publicized, year-long campaign to remain in the United States, despite several outstanding deportation orders. The fact that she received unstinting support from not only the church that offered her sanctuary, but from most other ostensibly religious organizations and orders demonstrates several things.

1. That the concern for most of these churches is not serving the congregants they currently have, but in expanding their congregation to include millions of individuals who come here as a result of what they view as an inevitable amnesty.

2. That most of these churches view themselves increasingly through the prism of politics, and view their own role as that of political agents seeking to effect dramatic cultural change.

While you can make a plausible argument that pursuing the first goal is a logical step in self-preservation-especially when you consider the decreasing attendance at many of these churches-I don’t think it can be justified under any doctrinal standards. As to the second point, I don’t have any problem with churches transforming themselves into  political entities-in this case, a sanctified version of La Raza, MALDEF, or LULAC-but in that case, I don’t think most Americans would view their current tax-exempt status in quite the same light.

Posted in Arizona, boycott, Roman Catholicism, SB1070 | Tagged | 2 Comments

See No Evil

Apparently, there are no illegal aliens working in the building and construction trades in the state of Nevada.

http://michellemalkin.com/2010/07/13/harry-reid-said-what/

Who knew?!

Posted in economy, Illegal Aliens | Tagged | 2 Comments

Genuine Liberalism

One of the labels that the immigration reform movement often gets tagged with by our opponents-other than “racist” or “xenophobe”-is “right wing.” The reason being that most of the prominent leaders in the campaign to alter the current status quo of unfettered, mass immigration can be classified, broadly speaking, as conservative.

Mark Krikorian is a conservative researcher and writer who leads the Center for Immigration Studies-an indispensable resource in the current battle over immigration flows. Victor Davis Hanson is a conservative historian whose writing on this subject has added immeasurably to our collective understanding of migration patterns, and the problems of assimilation in a culture where temporal barriers between different nations and cultures have been effectively erased. George Borjas is a distinguished economist from Harvard University, but one who is also closely associated with conservatism. I could go down the line, e.g. Roy Beck, Heather MacDonald, William Gheen, Congressman Steve King, etc., etc., ad infinitum, but I think you get the point.

The problem, as I see it, is not that liberals don’t want to see a dramatic change to our current immigration system, much in the same way as the individuals I listed above seek to change it, because repeated polls have shown that most Americans-even a substantial number of those who describe themselves as liberal or progressive-do want to see the system reformed to reflect a more balanced approach to the problem of immigration. It is that their purported leaders do not share their vision, and in fact work against their interests whenever the opportunity arises. Just look at President Obama’s decision to sue the state of Arizona because its legislature has decided to enforce laws that should be the primary province of a derelict federal government. Most of the people who voted for President Obama, or at the very least, a substantial minority of those voters, want to see SB 1070 take effect, and would even support a similar measure if enacted in their own states. But their pleas fall on deaf ears.

While the ostensible representatives of liberal Americans seem to be arrayed against their interests-and the interests of Americans-the good news is that there are progressives who haven’t given up the fight. One such group is Progressives for Immigration Reform, whose website you’ll find by visiting this link:

http://www.progressivesforimmigrationreform.org/

I bet you didn’t even realize there were progressives who are in favor of real immigration reform, did you?  Show them you support their efforts, even if you don’t consider yourself a progressive. These are the people who are carrying on the grand legacy of Congresswoman Barbara K. Jordan, a woman whose valiant efforts to rein in our chaotic immigration system are completely ignored by the CBC and DNC. They might praise her name, but they don’t have the slightest clue what she stood for, otherwise they’d be supporting the work of real progressives to change our immigration system for the better, not to worsen problems that already exist.

Posted in Arizona, BICE, economy, feds, Illegal Aliens, Immigration, liberalism, lobbying, SB1070, Uncategorized | Tagged | 2 Comments

Problem Solved

I seem to have overcome the difficulty I had embedding links in previous posts. So if you want to access previous articles I’ve linked to, simply click on the links and they should open in the same window. As I’ve already stated, this is my first real attempt at blogging on a regular basis so I expect to encounter some problems along the way. Hopefully, my limited audience will bear me with me for the time being.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | Leave a comment