Sanctuary cities have long been a source of contention. Sanctuary cities purposefully limit cooperation with the national government in order to assist illegal immigrants in avoiding deportation. Rather than notifying Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), sanctuary cities often choose not to comply and instead release offenders. While proponents would argue that illegal immigrants should be protected and have rights, we as a nation are missing the big picture of why a fractured enforcement of our immigration policy simply does not make sense.
Whether you choose to label them “illegal immigrants” or the kinder “undocumented immigrants”, there is no getting around the fact that these individuals are not American citizens, do not have the proper paperwork to be in this country, and are not entitled to the same freedoms we enjoy as citizens. Our founding fathers made it very clear that America belongs to her citizens. Does an offender that breaks into your house illegally have a right to live in your house? Does breaking and entering confer ownership? Does an individual that steals your car have a right to drive it? Does their crime give them rights? You can choose to be kind on how to label them, but what these individuals are doing is indeed illegal. Legidimizing their crime by creating a path to citizenship, lax enforcement of laws and weak borders embolden more individuals every day to break our laws and enter our country illegally.
Let us also make one clear distinction. Proper enforcement of our immigration laws does not constitute discrimination. Law knows no race, religion or language. While the left would be happy for us to back off the argument by claiming discrimination of Hispanic individuals, the enforcement of our borders and laws is not a question of discrimination. If we were discussing the Canadian border, the legality of the argument is exactly the same.
Recently, the battle of Sanctuary Cities took a different turn. The Oakland City Council has approved a measure encouraging “sanctuary workplaces”. Within these workplaces, the council called for individual workplaces to also knowingly violate federal law and not discriminate based on immigration status. Basically, it calls for businesses to look the other way and not report illegal immigrants.
“Whether you are a black family who has been here for generations or a black or brown recent immigrant, we all have the right to decide where we call home. When we go to work, we should be valued for the contributions we make, and we should be able to do our jobs free from fear of deportations.” Wei-Ling Huber, local labor leader and President of Unite Here Local 2850, told local CBS affiliate KPIX.
Huber called for provisions protecting workers from retaliation based on immigration status when they stand up for their rights. Presumably, the “immigration status” to which Huber is referring is the status known as “illegal”.
No, Ms. Huber, you don’t have the right to decide where you “call home” if you are not a legal citizen of our nation. Illegal immigrants who choose to call America “home” cost U.S. Taxpayers $113 billion per year at the federal, state, and local levels. Most illegal immigrants do not pay taxes, while consuming medical services, education, and public assistance paid for by taxpayers according to the Federation for American Immigration Reform.
The law is clear. Elected officials’ are charged to carry out their duties and responsibilities under the law not above it. It is not the prerogative, the right, or the power of a city council to choose which federal laws to enforce. It is our right to debate these laws. It is our right to disagree, to organize and to discuss these topics. It is our right to bring lawsuits to our courts. Using the authority of a city council position to knowingly ask others to break the law is unethical, irresponsible and a blatant abuse of authority.
When you commit a crime you are not a victim, you are a perpetrator. Conferring victimhood status on illegal immigrants while advocating for the privatization of sanctuary city lawbreaking begs the question of how far this ideology will go. If left to the liberals in California, the inmates will truly be running the asylum.
(a) Criminal penalties
(A) Any person who—
(i) knowing that a person is an alien, brings to or attempts to bring to the United States in any manner whatsoever such person at a place other than a designated port of entry or place other than as designated by the Commissioner, regardless of whether such alien has received prior official authorization to come to, enter, or reside in the United States and regardless of any future official action which may be taken with respect to such alien;
(ii) knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, transports, or moves or attempts to transport or move such alien within the United States by means of transportation or otherwise, in furtherance of such violation of law;
(iii) knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, conceals, harbors, or shields from detection, or attempts to conceal, harbor, or shield from detection, such alien in any place, including any building or any means of transportation;
(iv) encourages or induces an alien to come to, enter, or reside in the United States, knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that such coming to, entry, or residence is or will be in violation of law; or
(I) engages in any conspiracy to commit any of the preceding acts, or
(II) aids or abets the commission of any of the preceding acts,