DoJ’s decision to sue yet another State, this time Utah, over a State-level effort to enforce immigration law, and thereby protect its people, gives rise to this post. Eric Holder’s “Justice” Department, with this suit, is once again trotting out its tired beef that ” [T]he law mandates enforcement measures that can disrupt immigration practices by the federal government in the area.” Holder claims, with a straight face, that
…a patchwork of immigration laws is not the answer and will only create further problems in our immigration system.
Holder further insists without a trace of irony that under the law, individuals could potentially be harassed and wrongfully detained. This, though, is nothing but prior restraint, which is not allowed in other legal contexts. Holder needs to show the harassment and wrongful detention that’s actually occurred, not just speculate about an uncertain and unlikely future.
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano insists that
This kind of legislation diverts critical law enforcement resources from the most serious threats to public safety and undermines the vital trust between local jurisdictions and the communities they serve.
Napolitano, however, is being wholly disingenuous on a number of grounds. Illegal immigration by serious criminals—drug runners and “ordinary” criminals, for instance—is a serious threat, and the Utah law requires proof of citizenship explicitly only on arrests for serious crimes; the police are only authorized, not required, to ask for proof of citizenship on lesser arrests. Further, illegals aren’t part of the community; the “vital trust” meme is wholly irrelevant. Finally, if such legislation “diverts critical law enforcement resources” from doing their jobs, then what is it, exactly, these “resources” are doing instead?
Others suggest that rather than harassing the States that are trying to protect their citizens with immigration enforcement measures, DoJ should go after the sanctuary counties and cities, which actively and illegally shelter illegal aliens. Senator Jeff Sessions (R, AL), for instance, suggested that
the Attorney General take a little timeout from his lawsuit against Arizona or Alabama or other states, and focus a little bit of his attention on a major jurisdiction such as Cook County that is willfully and deliberately acting to undermine federal law enforcement.
Even more egregious is that the administration has refused to take any action against states and localities that affirmatively, proactively and intentionally impede the immigration enforcement in the United States. These jurisdictions include San Francisco County, Santa Clara County, Washington, D.C…..
Additionally, Senator Sessions noted that Napolitano had told the Senate Judiciary Committee at the end of October that she had not looked into the Cook County immigration policies.
What is, then, Holder’s and this administration’s federal government Immigration System? It’s Open Borders, anyone can come in, no matter who they are, from terrorists to drug runners to general criminals to farm workers to factory workers. There are some exceptions, though, that we do keep out. If a potential immigrant, or a legal alien wannabe, has highly valuable technical skills, or is well-versed in IT or science or research, then join our lottery. We’ll take the top 5; the rest can stay home and try again next year. If a foreign student has graduated from one of our universities, and now wants to convert his student visa into a more permanent one so he can stay and work in the US, well, good for that student. He should put a star on his calendar for his success. But he needs to get out and go home. We don’t have room for him. That’s our federal government Immigration System, and that’s unacceptable.
In the meantime, all those drug runners and terrorists and run-of-the-mill criminals are left to the individual States to deal with—but without a State law to help them.