Archive | sanctuary cities RSS feed for this section

Mark Caserta: Sanctuary cities affect sovereignty, safety

5 Nov


Mark Caserta:  Free State Patriot editor

Nov 3, 2017




Opening statements began last week in the case of Katie Steinle, 32, who was killed as she strolled along the San Francisco waterfront with her father. Steinle was fatally shot by a homeless illegal immigrant who had returned to the U.S. multiple times illegally.

Per multiple news sources, including Fox News, Steinle’s father delivered an emotional testimony, sharing Katie’s ardent plea, “Help me, dad,” as her last words.

Two days after Steinle was killed, then-presidential candidate Donald Trump unleashed a scathing statement on the shooting.

“This senseless and totally preventable act of violence committed by an illegal immigrant is yet another example of why we must secure our border immediately,” he said. “This is an absolutely disgraceful situation, and I am the only one that can fix it. Nobody else has the guts to even talk about it. This won’t happen if I become president.”

Trump was, no doubt, referencing the role of “so-called” sanctuary cities, ignoring federal immigration law and providing aid and protection for illegals entering our country.

San Francisco, for example, passed an ordinance in 1989 prohibiting city employees, funds or resources from assisting Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in enforcing federal immigration law. If an illegal was identified through contact such as an arrest, ICE was not to be notified, protecting them from possible deportation.

Since becoming president, Trump has been delivering on his promise to the American people by helping enforce current immigration law. National Border Patrol Council President Brandon Judd reports a “miraculous” drop in illegal immigration under the Trump administration, per Fox Business.

Within a week following being sworn into office, President Trump ignited a firestorm when he signed an executive order designed to crack down on sanctuary cities and “jurisdictions” that harbor illegal immigrants by stripping them of federal grant money. The order, by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, directs the Office of Management and Budget to compile federal grant money going to the sanctuary districts.

Aside from cities, at least five states, California, Oregon, Connecticut, Rhode Island and Vermont, have “enacted laws that limit how much police can contribute assistance to federal immigration agents,” according to the New York Times. The Times also noted it’s difficult to determine just how many cities offer sanctuary for illegals, since some do not have an official ordinance or policy in place.

“Unfortunately, over the last several decades, respect for the rule of law has broken down and immigration enforcement has been sacrificed for the sake of political expediency,” said Attorney Jeff Sessions in a statement released by the White House this month.

There is no “up side” for protecting illegal immigrants in our country, beyond the Democrats’ political ambition for creating a dependable voter base. And frankly, they’re willing to do so at the expense of our nation’s sovereignty and our citizens’ safety.

Any sanctuary states, cities and/or jurisdictions found guilty of breaking federal law should be held accountable, financially, and the leaders responsible should face criminal charges. Anything less compromises the rule of law.

Mark Caserta is a conservative blogger, a Cabell County resident and a regular contributor to The Herald-Dispatch editorial page.





Mark Caserta: Sanctuary cities aren’t above the law

16 Jul


Mark Caserta: Free State Patriot editor

Jul. 16, 2015 @ 12:01 AM

Why would our government permit any U.S. city to knowingly and willingly harbor illegal aliens?

Cities around the country, known as “sanctuary cities,” are literally incentivizing illegal immigration by adopting policies which essentially nullify federal immigration law. And it’s no surprise that these are some of the most liberal cities in the United States.

So are these cities within their right to circumvent federal law and endanger the sovereignty of our nation, aid in crippling our economy, and put innocent lives at risk? How does one justify such an abominable progressive policy?

mc 3

Liberals justify the need for creating sanctuary policies under the guise of “protecting immigrant rights.” But clearly these are not immigrants, but illegal aliens who should be subject to deportation under federal law.

Sanctuary policies are generally passed by a local governing body in the form of a resolution, ordinance or administrative action. They usually instruct city employees not to notify the federal government of the presence of illegal aliens living in their communities. Since there is vague distinction between legal and illegal aliens, these individuals typically benefit from taxpayer-funded government services and programs.

In protecting these illegals, many with criminal backgrounds are allowed to remain in the country. While policies differ, if an illegal is arrested for a crime in a sanctuary city, they may serve jail time, but will not be turned over to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) for deportation. Many are repeat offenders and when released, lurk as an ongoing danger to a community.

According to a July column written by Jessica Vaughn for the Center for Immigration Studies, 276 jurisdictions, both state and local, have caused the release of more than 8,000 criminal alien offenders across the country over an eight-month period. Vaughn cites ICE records obtained in a Freedom of Information Act request.

According to the records, 63 percent of the individuals freed by local authorities had prior criminal histories or were labeled a “public safety concern.” Nearly 1,900 of the released offenders subsequently were arrested for another crime within the eight-month period.


One such offender was Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez, an illegal alien who had been deported five times and had racked up seven felony convictions. While in the midst of yet another deportation, the city of San Francisco asked for custody of Sanchez to pursue prior drug charges. Unremarkably, these charges were dropped, but in accordance to the city’s long standing sanctuary policies, Sanchez was not returned to ICE for deportation. Less than three months later, Sanchez was accused of shooting and killing Kathryn Steinle, a 32-year-old out for an evening stroll with her father along the waterfront.

Progressive policies like this are destroying our nation, not flags, guns or otherwise. But while liberal Democrats continue down this debilitating road, the GOP continues to lack the intestinal fortitude to address politically volatile issues.

It’s time for impotent politicians to make way for patriots willing to stand up and be heard.

When it comes to illegal immigration, no city is above the law.

Mark Caserta is a conservative blogger, a Cabell County resident and a regular contributor to The Herald-Dispatch editorial page.

%d bloggers like this: