340 Sanctuary “Cities”

Radio Commentary, 90.7, 91.7 New Life FM, April 15, 2016 – By Sue Ella Deadwyler

Under local and federal laws, if you and I interfere with the capture of fugitives or conceal their location or conspire to break the law, we could be charged with aiding and abetting criminals or obstructing justice or conspiring to break the law. We, certainly, would NOT be getting government grants for sheltering proven criminals.

The sheltering system I’m talking about is the decades-old system of “sanctuary cities.” They may be cities or counties or local governments that shield illegal aliens from federal immigration laws, and refuse to cooperate with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents.

Proponents of sanctuary cities claim they protect immigrant rights, but illegal aliens are not immigrants. An immigrant is a person who enters the U.S. legally, maintains legal presence and does not overstay a visa. Illegal aliens are those who enter the U.S. illegally or do not leave when their visa expires.

Congress passed a law against illegal sanctuary in 1996. That federal law requires local governments to cooperate with ICE agents. But counties and communities that disagree with the law continue to adopt “sanctuary” policies that shield illegal aliens. Currently, illegal alien offenders are being sheltered in 340 locations across America. Continue reading →

Illegal Sanctuary

Radio Commentary, 90.7, 91.7 New Life FM, November 27, 2015 – By Sue Ella Deadwyler

In 1996 when folks seemed to know what’s right and wrong, Congress passed a law requiring local governments to cooperate with federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents. But, defiant towns, counties and communities deliberately adopted “sanctuary” policies, telling local government employees NOT to report illegals living there. So, illegal aliens are protected from arrest and deportation, while receiving the same benefits legal residents get.

In October the Center for Immigration Studies reported that roughly 340 jurisdictions in the United States give sanctuary to illegal aliens, and during the first nine months of 2014, local sanctuaries released 9,295 alien offenders federal agents wanted detained. Since federal ICE agents could not re-locate most of them, 69 percent remained at large to commit other crimes, which 20 percent of them did.

Not only are some local governments ignoring ICE requests to detain illegal aliens for federal pick-up, they are choosing which criminals to hold and which to release into the community. In other words, local sanctuary governments are protecting deportable criminal alien offenders by hindering communication between ICE agents and local law enforcement.

For years, Dalton, Georgia has been on the sanctuary city list, but in December 2014 Clayton County, Georgia was listed among 41 new locations that have adopted formal or informal sanctuary policies. Informal policies could be as simple as word-of-mouth instructions NOT to report and NOT to cooperate with federal ICE agents. Continue reading →

Lawlessness on Steroids

Radio Commentary, 90.7, 91.7 New Life FM, November 6, 2015 – By Sue Ella Deadwyler

When 340 jurisdictions in the United States give sanctuary to illegal aliens, it’s a serious two-fold problem. 1) Local governments that give sanctuary are ignoring laws against entering the U.S. illegally, and 2) are refusing to enforce federal law requiring them to report to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) illegal aliens that commit crimes there.

The problem is so serious that Republican Congressman Duncan Hunter from California introduced an Enforce the Law for Sanctuary Cities Act as a first step to stopping it. If it became law, State Criminal Alien Assistance funding would be withheld from state or local governments that inhibit enforcement of federal immigration laws or prohibit officials from gathering citizenship information for any individual. Meaning, local jurisdictions that do not notify ICE would lose their allocation of federal funding, which is almost $800 million for FY 2015 alone.

Also losing funds would be jurisdictions that have enacted a law, policy, or procedure that shuts down such communication with Immigration and Naturalization Service, ICE, or other government entity about individual citizenship or that prohibits local law enforcement from gathering such data. Continue reading →