In his first week in office, President Donald Trump issued an executive order directing the Department of Homeland Security to deport most illegal immigrants who come in contact with law enforcement. His order is based on the widespread perception that illegal immigrants are a significant source of crime in the United States.
Congress should act to rein in the DOJ’s forfeiture powers and respect state limits on civil forfeiture. Likewise, state governments should remove the financial incentive police departments have to shake down innocent drivers.
The bill’s namesake is Kate Steinle, a 32-year-old medical sales rep killed in San Francisco in 2015. Her killer was Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez, who was in the country without status after five removals. Proponents of this bill—providing lengthier prison sentences for people who reenter the country after a removal—believe that this would have somehow helped Kate Steinle. But in reality, the facts of this tragedy do not support these policies.
Law enforcement in the United States has traditionally been handled at the local level. This is appropriate considering this country’s diversity and its federalist system. Local police departments are acting lawfully when they choose to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement efforts. But so too are police departments that have determined officers shouldn’t be involved in enforcing federal law.
Despite what some might think, sanctuary cities are not in and of themselves more dangerous than cities that don’t have sanctuary policies in place. In addition, there evidence shows local cooperation with federal immigration authorities can harm police-community relationships.
Given this state of affairs it shouldn’t be a surprise that some local officials have determined that sanctuary policies are appropriate for their communities.
Yet, asserting rights is no guarantee against arrest. Even the most professional officers use tactics to get around constitutional rights, and some officers make false arrests and conduct illegal searches.
In his joint address to Congress on Tuesday, President Trump again called attention to “immigrant crime,” and announced the creation the Victims Of Immigration Crime Engagement office, or VOICE, which would “work with victims of crimes committed by undocumented immigrants.” However, as Cato scholar Alex Nowrasteh has noted, immigrants are less crime-prone than natives.
There are two broad types of studies that investigate immigrant criminality — and both disprove the popular rhetoric that immigrants increase crime.
However, there are some potential problems with Census-based studies that could lead to inaccurate results. That’s where the second type of study comes in….
Immigration enforcement falls within the federal government’s prerogative, regardless of one’s opinion on current immigration laws. However, that does not make every single enforcement action wise or justifiable.
Inherent suspicion of police is dangerous to a community’s well-being, whether that community is comprised of immigrants or the native born.
Non-cooperation makes police officers’ jobs harder by emboldening and enriching criminals who, consequently, may operate with impunity where people are less willing to help investigators.
Not only does a lack of trust make policing harder, a mistrustful community puts police officers at risk.
A D.C.-based public policy research organization (or "think tank") dedicated to the values of individual liberty, limited government, free markets, and peace.
