"Increasingly it seems Americans in different parts of the country have opened their morning newspaper or turned on the TV and learned about an act of violence carried out by someone who is living in this country illegally. Alarmingly, many of these individuals have had previous contact with local law enforcement officials. Such is the case in Newark, New Jersey, where recently three innocent young people were tragically murdered. In the aftermath of this tragedy, we learned that one of the suspects -- an illegal immigrant -- was previously arrested on multiple occasions and, rather than being deported, was set free only to victimize again.
The situation in Newark didn't happen in a vacuum. It isn't new, nor is it relegated to just this one community. An alarming number of cities and towns throughout this nation have similar sanctuary policies on the books -- including both Minneapolis and St. Paul in my home state of Minnesota. In these cities, local law enforcement officials are barred from so much as inquiring about a suspect's immigration status and passing along their concerns to federal authorities for follow up action. The rationale for this practice is as antiquated as the practice itself. Yes, it is important to maintain good relations between immigrant communities and local law enforcement, but we must not hide behind that as an excuse for letting lawbreakers off the hook. In a post 9/11 world, the evidence has shown the consequences of sanctuary city policies can reach beyond just one community. Take for example Mohammed Atta, leader of the 9/11 hijackers. In 2001, he was stopped and ticketed for driving without a license in Florida. His visa was expired and yet he was simply allowed to continue on his way. ...
Opening the lines of communication between local and federal law enforcement officials is essential to protecting the security and safety of our citizens. Sanctuary cities like Newark, Minneapolis and others hinder that communication and prevent us from taking action against criminals before they act. In Minnesota, police officers have told me they feel their jobs could be threatened if they asked about immigration status in routine investigations. Simply put, our officers should not be handcuffed in their ability to protect the public.
The informational wall created by the sanctuary city loophole defies logic and, in this day and age, is harmful to our national security. We must give this tool back to our local law enforcement. And even though the debate in Washington over immigration reform has subsided for now, I will continue working with my colleagues to end the practice of sanctuary cities."
The situation in Newark didn't happen in a vacuum. It isn't new, nor is it relegated to just this one community. An alarming number of cities and towns throughout this nation have similar sanctuary policies on the books -- including both Minneapolis and St. Paul in my home state of Minnesota. In these cities, local law enforcement officials are barred from so much as inquiring about a suspect's immigration status and passing along their concerns to federal authorities for follow up action. The rationale for this practice is as antiquated as the practice itself. Yes, it is important to maintain good relations between immigrant communities and local law enforcement, but we must not hide behind that as an excuse for letting lawbreakers off the hook. In a post 9/11 world, the evidence has shown the consequences of sanctuary city policies can reach beyond just one community. Take for example Mohammed Atta, leader of the 9/11 hijackers. In 2001, he was stopped and ticketed for driving without a license in Florida. His visa was expired and yet he was simply allowed to continue on his way. ...
Opening the lines of communication between local and federal law enforcement officials is essential to protecting the security and safety of our citizens. Sanctuary cities like Newark, Minneapolis and others hinder that communication and prevent us from taking action against criminals before they act. In Minnesota, police officers have told me they feel their jobs could be threatened if they asked about immigration status in routine investigations. Simply put, our officers should not be handcuffed in their ability to protect the public.
The informational wall created by the sanctuary city loophole defies logic and, in this day and age, is harmful to our national security. We must give this tool back to our local law enforcement. And even though the debate in Washington over immigration reform has subsided for now, I will continue working with my colleagues to end the practice of sanctuary cities."
3 comments:
Sanctuary cities for those who have broken our laws goes against the grain of what this country stands for, the rule of law. What is wrong with our government officials?
I note that Giuliani still believes it was justified to declare New York a sanctuary city with 400,000 illegals. He thinks this helped him to reduce the crime rate. Just think of how much more that crime rate would have went down if he had turned all 400,000 illegals over the to the ICE man.
Guiliani is toast. Americans see thru his flip-flopping on illegal immgration. I wouldn't trust him with a ten foot pole. We don't need any more liars and traitors in public office, especially the White House.
Post a Comment