Law Would Punish Cities That Shield Illegal Immigrants
Law Would Punish Cities That Shield Illegal Immigrants
By BILLY HOUSE, The Tampa Tribune
Published: September 9, 2007
WASHINGTON - A Tampa Bay area congresswoman wants to deny some federal funding to localities that have what she describes as 'sanctuary' policies for illegal immigrants.
Under a bill that Rep. Ginny Brown-Waite will introduce this week, states and localities with policies that ban cooperation with federal officials in apprehending or removing undocumented immigrants from the country would lose federal funding that helps them pay for jailing noncitizens who commit crimes.
The Brooksville Republican says she continues to explore the idea of revoking other federal payments. She wrote Thursday to Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff asking what added authority, if any, he needs to compel localities to better cooperate with federal authorities in enforcing immigration laws.
'Sanctuary cities are an insult to law-abiding citizens,' Brown-Waite said during a hearing Wednesday in which she pressed Chertoff about cutting federal aid to these cities.
This Order Is On Books
New Haven, Conn., is such a city. It has a a general order to 'ignore' federal immigration and customs warrants, unless they are criminal in nature, for undocumented immigrants.
Told of Brown-Waite's bill, officials in New Haven said they know what's best for their constituents, even if it costs their city or state some federal aid.
'The mayor has always believed that the policies in New Haven are what's best for New Haven, and not necessarily anywhere else,' said Jessica Mayorga, a spokeswoman for New Haven Mayor John DeStefano Jr.
Brown-Waite dismissed that notion. 'I would say that they are probably grossly out of touch with their constituents.'
Brown-Waite's bill comes as a Rasmussen Reports national poll of 800 voters last month found that 58 percent of voters nationwide favor cutting off federal funding for what are known as 'sanctuary cities' that provide protections to illegal immigrants. Twenty-nine percent of those surveyed were against the idea.
GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney, a former Massachusetts governor whom Brown-Waite supports for the White House, proposed such a plan last month.
6 Months To Comply
Under Brown-Waite's bill - which also would seek to make illegal immigration a felony - a state or municipality could be targeted if it has in place 'a statute, policy or practice' that prevents law enforcement from cooperating with federal officials regarding illegal immigrants apprehended 'in the course of routine duties.'
Funding revocation would kick in if those policies continue six months after Brown-Waite's bill became law.
A draft of her legislation notes that $1 billion would be authorized by Congress annually for an existing Department of Justice program to reimburse states and localities for a portion of their costs of incarcerating illegal immigrants on state or local criminal charges and convictions.
That money would transfer to 'compliant states' under Brown-Waite's bill.
The one qualification: Local law enforcement agencies do not have to report the identity of a victim of a crime or a witness to a crime for the purpose of immigration enforcement or removal.
Brown-Waite's approach is similar to an amendment to a spending bill passed by the House this year. The amendment, sponsored by Rep. Tom Tancredo, a Colorado Republican running for president, would block Homeland Security funding in 2008 to localities that prevent cooperation between local police and federal immigration authorities.
But Brown-Waite acknowledges that determining which localities have set policies of noncooperation with federal officials is not easy, especially if the policies aren't in writing.
'Obviously there is no way of tracking it down if a particular police chief of sheriff just gives a verbal order,' she said.
New Haven's policy is a written order.
It states that in 'any contact with individuals in which warrant checks are performed,' an Immigration and Customs Enforcement warrant that does not involve criminal charges 'should be ignored.'
It also states that 'the individual will not be detained or taken into custody absent any criminal charges and ICE will not be notified in any manner of the person in question, under any circumstances.'
No Stated Policies In Florida
Tampa does not have such a policy, said Kirby Rainsberger, the police department's legal adviser.
'Absolutely not - official or unofficial,' Rainsberger said.
He said when police determine that someone in custody is an undocumented immigrant, the policy is to 'hold onto the folks we come across' and notify federal immigration and customs officials.
Thirty-one cities and counties nationwide were listed in an August 2006 Congressional Research Service report as having sanctuary policies.
No Florida municipalities were named. Brown-Waite said a list that she has also names no Florida cities.
But cities such as Los Angeles, San Diego, Detroit, Minneapolis, Baltimore, New York, San Francisco, Austin, Texas, and Cambridge, Mass., were identified in the Congressional Research Service report.
That report explains that most of those cities had adopted a 'don't ask-don't tell' policy in which they don't require city or county employees, including police, to report to federal officials immigrants who might be illegal.
At a U.S. House Committee on Homeland Security hearing last week, Chertoff seemed noncommittal under questioning by panel member Brown-Waite on the idea of threatening 'sanctuary cities' by withholding funding.
'People use the term 'sanctuary city' in different ways,' Chertoff responded. 'So I am never quite sure what they mean.'
Some cities, Chertoff said, don't tell the federal government about felons who are illegal immigrants in their custody.
'I think that's actually very foolish,' he said.
But 'I'm not aware of any city - although I may be wrong - that actually interferes with our ability to enforce the law,' Chertoff said.
Brown-Waite said she wasn't satisfied with Chertoff's answers at the hearing, including his comment, 'I don't know that I have the authority to cut off all Homeland Security funds if I disagree with the city's policy on immigration.'
She wrote a follow-up letter asking him to let her know what options, if any, his department has to take action against sanctuary cities.
If there are no legal options available, she wrote that she wants Chertoff to provide recommendations for what added authority he needs 'to enforce the law and require such cities to uphold established immigration laws and regulations.'
Reporter Billy House can be reached at 202 662-7673 or bhouse@tampatrib.com.
http://www2.tbo.com/content/2007/sep/09 ... s-politics
Chertoff responded. 'So I am never quite sure what they mean
"'People use the term 'sanctuary city' in different ways,' Chertoff responded. 'So I am never quite sure what they mean.'
Some cities, Chertoff said, don't tell the federal government about felons who are illegal immigrants in their custody.
'I think that's actually very foolish,' he said.
But 'I'm not aware of any city - although I may be wrong - that actually interferes with our ability to enforce the law,' Chertoff said.
He doesn't know what they mean? Oh he can't make a few calls and find out the laws in these nutty states and towns. Then decide whether or not it is following federal national security guidelines he should be recomending and implanting for our safety. Besides the obvious of making it a federal crime to be illegal. Chertoff does nothing but play lip service to nothing. He is completely incompetent and should be thrown into Mexico.
At least Ms. Brown-Waite is not taking his waffling stance and is actually trying to make him act like he was head of homeland security.
Re: Chertoff responded. 'So I am never quite sure what they
Quote:
Originally Posted by skeptic
"'People use the term 'sanctuary city' in different ways,' Chertoff responded. 'So I am never quite sure what they mean.'
Some cities, Chertoff said, don't tell the federal government about felons who are illegal immigrants in their custody.
'I think that's actually very foolish,' he said.
But 'I'm not aware of any city - although I may be wrong - that actually interferes with our ability to enforce the law,' Chertoff said.
He doesn't know what they mean? Oh he can't make a few calls and find out the laws in these nutty states and towns. Then decide whether or not it is following federal national security guidelines he should be recomending and implanting for our safety. Besides the obvious of making it a federal crime to be illegal. Chertoff does nothing but play lip service to nothing. He is completely incompetent and should be thrown into Mexico.
At least Ms. Brown-Waite is not taking his waffling stance and is actually trying to make him act like he was head of homeland security.
Anybody know how much we are paying this idiot?
