Posts

WATCH: AG Barr Announces ‘Significant Escalation’ to Shut Down Sanctuary Cities

/0 Comments/in , /by

US Attorney General William Barr announced that the Department of Justice would be escalating their efforts to combat the policies of “sanctuary cities” to aid illegal aliens.

“The department is filing a complaint against the State of New Jersey seeking declaratory and injunctive relief against its laws that forbid state and local law enforcement from sharing vital information about criminal aliens with DHS,” Barr said, according to Fox News.

Barr went on to say the legal action against New Jersey was just one of a number of lawsuits against municipalities that employ “sanctuary city” policies to undermine the enforcement of federal immigration law.

“We are filing a complaint seeking declaratory and injunctive relief against King County, Washington, for the policy,” Barr explained, “that forbids DHS from deporting aliens from the United States using King County International Airport.”

(Read more from “AG Barr Announces ‘Significant Escalation’ to Shut Down Sanctuary Cities” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Sanctuary Cities and Lack of Vetting Continue to Fuel Illegal Alien Crime

/0 Comments/in , /by

Every day, there are stories of Americans or immigrants being murdered, raped, or assaulted either by illegal aliens who could have been deported if not for sanctuary cities, by those admitted legally without proper vetting, or by those who have exploited immigration loopholes that should be closed.

Unfortunately, unlike the soul-searching that takes place after each mass shooting as to what sort of gun control policies can be enacted to somehow prevent a criminal from getting a gun, there is no soul-searching from a single prominent member of Congress after any one of these criminal alien cases as to what can be done to enforce national sovereignty and better prevent crime. There are no questions of how to close to the criminal alien loopholes, clamp down on sanctuary cities, or enforce our immigration laws to prevent 100 percent avoidable crimes.

Here is just a tiny sample of some of the most recent cases that should spawn a debate in Congress when it returns from recess in September.

Montgomery County, Maryland: Brutal rape, child molesting, and MS-13 activity

As Nate Madden reported, there are now four known illegal alien rape suspects in Montgomery County, Maryland, just from this past month. Montgomery is a hotbed of MS-13 and criminal alien activity in a substantial illegal alien population from Central America. Yet the county has rolled out its welcome mat to illegal aliens and works to shield them from detection of law enforcement in defiance of federal law.

In the latest incident, Kevin Mendoza, an illegal alien from Honduras, is accused of brutally raping a woman outside a Rockville, Maryland, apartment complex on Saturday night. As the police report, posted online by local ABC reporter Kevin Lewis, states, the suspect strangled and punched the victim so hard to subdue her that, according to hospital officials, it could have killed her. He then proceeded to rape her for seven minutes.

Here we have a case of an illegal alien using nothing but his body to rape and almost murder a woman. Yet there is no soul-searching about how to better detect and remove criminal aliens. The politicians focus on guns, not criminals, including those who would never be enticed to remain here if not for sanctuary cities.

Then, there is a new attempted rape of a 12-year-old, allegedly committed by a Guatemalan national while his wife was giving birth to a baby who will get “birthright” citizenship.

Smothering an elderly woman to death in sanctuary New Jersey

Juanita Rosario, a kind-hearted 74-year-old woman who was active in her Hispanic community in Camden, New Jersey, allowed Esteban Cabrera, 30, an illegal alien from Ecuador, to live in her home. On August 10, he is accused of repaying her kindness by smothering her to death on her bed.

According to an ICE spokesman, “U. S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has lodged a detainer on Esteban Fernando Cabrera Bermeo, 30, an unlawfully present Ecuadorian national, with Camden County Jail, N. J. Aug. 12 following his arrest for murder.”

Once again, we see that the people most often harmed by illegal aliens are Hispanic immigrants, and once again, it’s self-evident that because we do not enforce our immigration laws and because of the magnet of sanctuary states, bad people from other countries are allowed to kill.

Visa overstays never deported and committing gruesome murders without guns

Earlier this month, I reported how Billy Chemirmir, avisa overstay from Kenya, could have been deported multiple times but wound up remaining here and is now accused of killing 19 elderly Americans … with a pillow.

Similar to the case of Chemirmir, Ayoola Ajayi, a Nigerian national who was never deported after overstaying his visa, was allowed to work loopholes into legal status and likely engaged in immigration and marriage fraud. He is now accused of sexually assaulting a woman and charged with 19 counts of child porn in addition to being charged with the murder of 23-year-old University of Utah student MacKenzie Lueck. Her charred body was found in a shallow grave. Once again, the lack of immigration enforcement leads to death and assault – guns or no guns.

Florida senior beaten and burned by Cuban national. Where’s the vetting?

On Monday, Jorge Lachazo allegedly beat a 75-year-old woman to death in Boca Raton, Florida, while delivering a washer and dryer. He is accused of beating Evelyn Udell to death and setting her body on fire. A DHS source confirms with CR that Lachazo does have legal status, so there is no ICE detainer until he is actually convicted. I’m told further that he is a Cuban national, but it’s unclear how and when he got legal status. But why is the media not investigating his immigration background like they investigate the history of the weapon used in a shooting?

Again, where is the soul-searching on our vetting process for green cards to ensure we don’t add to our existing criminal population through elective immigration policies?

Mother and two daughters burned alive by illegal alien previously charged for assaulting her

In June, Areli Aguirre-Avilez, an illegal alien from Mexico, was charged with murdering a mother and two daughters with a gun in North Carolina. In addition, he was accused of statutory rape and domestic violence. He previously was charged with assaulting the mother (who was his ex-girlfriend) just last December, yet he was never apprehended by DHS.

Finally, it’s important to remember that many illegal aliens do actually use guns to kill, except it is 100 percent illegal for them to own any firearm of any caliber or capacity. Yet an illegal alien was recently charged murdering his wife with a .45-caliber pistol in Washington state last week.

Where is the national discussion on sanctuary cities? Without sanctuaries, illegal aliens could ostensibly not live in this country without being caught. Also, why is there is no investigation into tightening up our screening for green cards?

Where is the outcry of “DO SOMETHING” about the countless avoidable crimes committed by illegal aliens thanks to sanctuaries? Just in New York City, 3,000 illegal aliens were released over just a 12-month period in defiance of ICE detainers. These are all people arrested for crimes other than being here illegally. Now consider that fact that, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, 83 percent of all criminals released by states reoffend within 9 years. Every one of those crimes committed by people like this are 100 percent avoidable simply by enforcing federal law against defiance of the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution.

Can you imagine if as many people killed by sanctuary policies were killed by mass shootings and Democrats were not saying a word about guns? Now consider the GOP silence on criminal aliens and repeat offender criminals escaping justice. That asymmetry in passion, commitment, and focus is what sets the two parties apart in terms of their devotion to their respective party platforms. (For more from the author of “Sanctuary Cities and Lack of Vetting Continue to Fuel Illegal Alien Crime” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

DOMINOES FALLING: Another CA City Fighting Back Against State’s Sanctuary Law

/0 Comments/in , /by

By The Daily Wire. The dominos are beginning to fall in California, as one city after another is joining the movement to exempt themselves from the state’s sanctuary law.

On Monday, the Huntington Beach City Council voted 6 to 1 to sue the state over SB 54, which protects illegal immigrants by limiting the cooperation between local police and ICE agents. Congressman Dana Rohrabacher said, “I am very proud of the USA. I would suggest that those who advocate for sanctuary states are betraying the American people.”

Huntington Beach follows the city of Los Alamitos, whose city council voted 4-1 on March 19 to pass a city ordinance exempting it from SB 54.

That prompted leaders in Aliso Viejo and Buena Park to say the very next day that they planned to push for a version of the Los Alamitos ordinance.

Last week, the Orange County Board of Supervisors voted to condemn SB 54 and join a U.S. Justice Department lawsuit that contends the law is unconstitutional. California Governor Jerry Brown signed SB 54 into law in October 2017; it was implemented on January 1, 2018. The law forbids local and state law enforcement from various actions. (Read more from “DOMINOES FALLING: Another CA City Fighting Back Against State’s Sanctuary Law” HERE)

____________________________________

Huntington Beach Prepares to Sue State to Challenge ‘Sanctuary’ Immigration Laws

By Los Angeles Times. Huntington Beach plans to file a lawsuit against California and the state attorney general to challenge the legality of state mandates that expand protections for undocumented immigrants . . .

Several area cities have pushed against the sanctuary laws, starting in March, when the Los Alamitos City Council passed an ordinance opting out . . .

And the county Board of Supervisors voted last week to join a Trump administration lawsuit that contends the laws obstruct federal immigration law and thus violate the Constitution’s supremacy clause, which gives federal law precedence over state law.

Gates said Huntington will be the first city to challenge the legality of SB 54, authored by state Senate leader Kevin de León (D-Los Angeles), and he said he hopes “other cities in California follow our lead.” (Read more from “Huntington Beach Prepares to Sue State to Challenge ‘Sanctuary’ Immigration Laws” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

State Aims to Be ‘Sanctuary State’ for Gun Rights

/0 Comments/in , , /by

. . .A West Virginia lawmaker has introduced a bill to the state House that would outlaw enforcement of current and future gun-control laws that violate the U.S. or state constitutions.

House Bill 2138, introduced by Republican Del. Pat McGeehan, would effectively nullify all federal gun control within the state’s boundaries, according to a report from the Tenth Amendment Center. The bill would make any attempt to enforce such laws a felony.

HB2138 reads:

“All current and future federal, state, and local statutes, ordinances, laws, orders, rules, and any other actions which attempt to restrict, tax, or regulate the possession, use, discharge in lawful self-defense, transportation, purchase, acquisition, sale, transfer, ownership, carrying, manufacture, or repair of firearms, firearm accessories, ammunition and their accouterments contradict the true meaning and original intent of the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States and Section twenty-two, Article III of the Constitution of the State of West Virginia. Those statutes, ordinances, laws, orders and rules which violate the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of West Virginia are invalid, and therefore, are null and void.”

McGeehan’s bill is a page out of “Federalist #46,” where Madison laid out a strategy for nixing unpopular or unconstitutional federal programs. Among Madison’s remedies was “refusal to cooperate with officers of the Union.” The West Virginia bill goes two steps further by offering legal assistance to state citizens targeted by federal agents enforcing unconstitutional gun laws, and by subjecting federal, state or local agents attempting to enforce federal gun laws to arrest, prosecution, jail and fines.

(Read more from “State Aims to Be ‘Sanctuary State’ for Gun Rights” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

DHS to Charge Leaders of Sanctuary Cities

/0 Comments/in , /by

Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen confirmed Tuesday that her department has asked federal prosecutors to see if they can lodge criminal charges against sanctuary cities that refuse to cooperate with federal deportation efforts.

“The Department of Justice is reviewing what avenues may be available,” Ms. Nielsen told the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Her confirmation came after California’s new sanctuary law went into effect Jan. 1, severely restricting cooperation the state or any of its localities could offer.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Director Tom Homan says those policies put his officers and local communities at more risk because they have to arrest illegal immigrants out in the community.

Mr. Homan told The Washington Times last July that he wanted to see local officials charged as complicit in human smuggling if they shielded illegal immigrants through sanctuary policies. (Read more from “DHS to Charge Leaders of Sanctuary Cities” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

The Absurd Reasoning a Clinton-Appointed Judge Used to Strike Down Sanctuary City Law

/0 Comments/in , /by

A federal judge in San Antonio appointed by President Bill Clinton, Orlando Garcia, has issued a temporary restraining order against portions of Texas’ new sanctuary city law.

SB 4, which was set to take effect on Sept. 1, outlawed sanctuary policies by Texas counties, cities, and municipalities.

This order is wrong on two levels: It interferes with the prerogatives of a state government, and it misinterprets federal immigration law. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton as well as Gov. Greg Abbott (the state’s former attorney general) have already announced that they intend to appeal to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

As Garcia explains, SB 4 (which applies to illegal aliens already arrested or lawfully detained) does four things. It prohibits local government entities from preventing their police officers from:

1) Checking the immigration status of criminals.

2) Notifying the federal government that they are holding criminal illegal aliens.

3) Assisting or cooperating with federal immigration officers (including honoring detainer warrants on illegal aliens issued by federal authorities).

4) Permitting federal immigration officers to enter local jails and conducting investigations of criminal illegal aliens.

The penalties for violating SB 4 range from civil fines to criminal punishment.

In a 94-page opinion released Wednesday, Garcia refused to enjoin the first and second portions of the law. However, he stopped enforcement of the other provisions based on erroneous reasoning, ignoring the fact that state governments, unlike the federal government, have enormous power over local municipalities—including the power to dissolve them.

As the Supreme Court observed in 1907 in Hunter v. Pittsburgh, the “number, nature, and duration of the powers conferred upon [municipal] corporations and the territory over which they shall be exercised rests in the absolute discretion of the state.”

Garcia was handicapped from enjoining the first and second provisions of SB 4 because they are similar to a law that Arizona passed back in 2010, to the great consternation of the Obama administration, which sued Arizona.

That case went all the way to the Supreme Court, which in 2012 in Arizona v. U.S., upheld the ability of states to require that the immigration status of criminals be checked and the federal government notified when local law enforcement officials are holding an illegal alien arrested for violating a local or state law.

The judge did temporarily enjoin the third and fourth provisions of SB 4 by totally misinterpreting federal law.

In order to encourage local jurisdictions to assist the federal government in enforcing immigration law, Congress added a section to federal immigration law, popularly known as the 287(g) program, which is codified at 8 U.S.C. §1357.

This allows the attorney general to enter into written agreements with local law enforcement authorities to provide them with both money and training in immigration enforcement.

The 287(g) program wasn’t intended to provide the exclusive means for local officials to help the federal government in immigration enforcement. It was simply meant to encourage more jurisdictions to do so by providing training and federal money.

The Obama administration hated this program so much it did everything it could to end it.

Yet Garcia illogically (or intentionally) misreads this statute to hold that local and state officials cannot assist or cooperate with federal immigration authorities in enforcement activities unless they meet all of the “exacting requirements” of the 287(g) program and its authorizing federal statute.

He does this despite the plain language of the statute that specifically states that this provision shall not “be construed to require an agreement” in order for state or local officials to “communicate with the attorney general regarding the immigration status of any individual, including reporting knowledge that a particular alien is not lawfully present in the United States; or (B) otherwise to cooperate with the Attorney General in the identification, apprehension, detention, or removal of aliens not lawfully present in the U.S.”

Another odd argument the judge makes is that the Texas statute violates the First Amendment because it contains a provision that says that local jurisdictions cannot “adopt, enforce, or endorse” a sanctuary policy. Garcia claims the word “endorse” is vague and overbroad.

But as Texas points out in the motion for a stay that it has already filed, a simple review of a dictionary shows that the word “endorse” means to “sanction,” and sanction means to ratify, authorize, or permit.

The language of SB 4 makes it obvious that it is intended to “stop local law enforcement agencies from having policies that obstruct cooperation with federal immigration officials.” This resolves any claim that the word “endorse” is “vague.”

The judge also found that requiring local law enforcement to honor detainer warrants violates the Fourth Amendment.

Detainer warrants are issued by the Department of Homeland Security for illegal aliens who are legally removable from the country and filed with local law enforcement officials, asking them to hold the illegal aliens for 48 hours so they can be picked up by federal authorities.

But as Texas says in its stay motion, “if the Constitution allows Congress to authorize federal immigration officials to take aliens into custody based on civil removability grounds, then it makes no difference for Fourth Amendment purposes whether state officials carry out the first 48 hours of that detention at the behest of the federal government.”

In other words, since federal authorities have the power to detain illegal aliens, “the fact that state officials are doing so at the direct request of federal officials” is irrelevant to the Fourth Amendment.

Texas is sure to appeal, and it should. Garcia’s decision not only interferes with the inherent police powers of state governments and their absolute authority over their political subdivisions, it severely misreads federal immigration law.

As the governor himself said, Garcia’s “decision makes Texas communities less safe. … [G]ang members and dangerous criminals … will be set free to prey upon our communities.” (For more from the author of “The Absurd Reasoning a Clinton-Appointed Judge Used to Strike Down Sanctuary City Law” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Mexico Joins the Legal Battle Against Anti-Sanctuary City Law

/0 Comments/in , /by

Mexico filed an affidavit Monday in support of a lawsuit against the implementation of a Texas law to punish sanctuary cities and allow police officers to inquire about the immigration status of someone they have arrested or detained.

The Mexican government said in a statement that the law could increase racial discrimination and create an environment of persecution.

The statement said that the number of calls to the center for information and assistance for Mexicans in Texas in May and June increased 678 percent compared to the year prior. This is reflexive of the uncertainty and “anguish” that the Mexican community in Texas has felt due to the law.

Texas’ Senate Bill 4 punishes local officials that don’t comply with federal immigration detainers. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, who signed the bill into law in May, said this could lead to sheriffs of sanctuary cities being “in the same jail with the criminals they are trying to protect.” (Read more from “Mexico Joins the Legal Battle Against Anti-Sanctuary City Law” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Judge Will Reconsider Ruling Blocking Trump’s Sanctuary Cities Order

/0 Comments/in , , /by

A federal judge Tuesday agreed to reconsider his ruling blocking President Donald Trump’s executive order to cut funding from cities that limit cooperation with U.S. immigration authorities.

U.S. District Judge William Orrick accepted the administration’s request to reconsider his April ruling. He gave the two California counties that challenged the executive order — San Francisco and Santa Clara — two weeks to file any documents opposing the request.

The administration was facing a Tuesday deadline to file paperwork to seek a second review by Orrick. (Read more from “Judge Will Reconsider Ruling Blocking Trump’s Sanctuary Cities Order” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Crime-Ridden Sanctuary City of Chicago Can’t Have It Both Ways: No Federal Funds for Situation They Created

/0 Comments/in , , /by

When asked whether President Donald Trump would still cut off law enforcement funds to the city of Chicago because it’s a sanctuary city even though it could hamper police from fighting violent crime, White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer said sanctuary cities can’t have it both ways – refusing to cooperate with federal immigration officials and still expecting to get law enforcement grants to handle a situation they created.

“You can’t be a sanctuary city and at the same time seem to pretend or express concern about law enforcement or ask for more money when probably a number of the funds that you’re using in the first place are going to law enforcement to handle the situation that you’ve created for yourself,” Spicer said.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced this week that the Justice Department would not only block sanctuary cities from receiving future DOJ grants, it would recoup the federal funds it already sent to those jurisdictions.

“Chicago gets about $12 million a year in law enforcement assistance from the federal government. Would President Trump cut off those funds due to the sanctuary city status even though it would greatly hamper the police fight against street violence, something the president has repeatedly said troubles him greatly?” a reporter asked.

“It’s interesting, you talk about street violence and then we cut off the funding for sanctuary cities. I think it would be interesting to want to send more money to a city that is allowing people to come into the country who are breaking the law, who, in many cases, are committing crimes — member of gangs,” Spicer said. (Read more from “Crime-Ridden Sanctuary City of Chicago Can’t Have It Both Ways: No Federal Funds for Situation They Created” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Massachusetts Sheriff Demands That Elected Leaders of Sanctuary Cities Be Arrested

/0 Comments/in , /by

A Massachusetts law enforcement official testifying before Congress on Tuesday called for leaders of sanctuary cities to be arrested.

Bristol County Sheriff Thomas Hodgson told the House Subcommittee on Illegal Immigration that sanctuary cities “have become magnets for illegal aliens, some of which have violent criminal records.”

“If these sanctuary cities are going to harbor and conceal criminal illegal aliens from ICE, which is in direct violation of Title 8 of the U.S. Code, federal arrest warrants should be issued for their elected officials,” Hodgson said. “Our citizens would be safer if we never stopped enforcing immigration law and if we never formed or turned a blind eye toward sanctuary cities.”

He also took aim at a Massachusetts legislator who passed along rumors of a planned ICE raid in Brockton on Tuesday and Wednesday . . .

“This is the most outrageous, outrageous example of what is going on across the United States that is undermining my job and every other law enforcement officer in the United States,” he said. (Read more from “Massachusetts Sheriff Demands That Elected Leaders of Sanctuary Cities Be Arrested” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.