Trending News

It’s past time to arrest politicians impeding immigration enforcement

Summary:

Democratic leaders, including Illinois Governor JB Pritzker and former Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot, are accused of violating federal immigration laws by facilitating the entry of millions of undocumented immigrants. In response, former President Donald Trump’s reelection campaign has prioritized mass deportations, sparking fierce opposition from progressive politicians. Controversially, some Democrats have proposed tracking ICE agents, raising concerns about officer safety and constitutional conflicts under the Supremacy Clause. Legal experts warn that obstructing federal immigration enforcement could lead to dangerous confrontations between state and federal authorities.

What This Means for You:

  • Safety Risks for Law Enforcement: Publicly tracking ICE agents could endanger their lives and families, undermining national security efforts.
  • Legal Consequences: State officials interfering with federal immigration enforcement may face prosecution under 8 U.S. Code § 1324.
  • Constitutional Conflict: The Supremacy Clause ensures federal law overrides state actions, setting the stage for potential legal battles.
  • Future Outlook: Escalating tensions between federal and state authorities could lead to violent clashes or judicial interventions.

Original Post:

Democrats led by Joe Biden’s handlers, in violation of multiple federal immigration laws, allowed as many as 20 million illegal aliens into the United States in just four years. Donald Trump was reelected on the promise to deport those illegal aliens, which Democrats, anarchists, socialists, communists and other enemies of America violently oppose.

Among the loudest voices in opposition to the rule of law are Illinois Governor JB Pritzger and Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson. Former Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot is also on board:

Graphic: X Post

Graphic: X Post

During a Tuesday interview on WTTW-TV’s Chicago Tonight, former Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot outlined a proposal to establish a centralized archive containing detailed personal information on every Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent operating in the U.S. She told host Paris Schutz she wants to know the agents’ “height, weight, hair color, they wear their vests in a particular way … even the masks that they wear, the shoes that they wear, the cars that they’re driving.”

Lightfoot continued:

We have a right to compile that information and put together a profile of each of these agents that’s alleged to have committed a crime. This is not about doxxing them or putting them in danger.

That’s exactly what Lightfoot wants to do. While law enforcement officers, local, state and federal, are public employees, attempts to doxx them are thinly veiled attempts to harass, even kill, them and their families and to intimidate them into failing to do their jobs. They’re also threatening to arrest federal immigration agents for supposed “crimes.” AG Pam Bondi is responding:

Graphic: X Post

Graphic: X Post

Current Illinois Democrat politicians are on the doxxing bandwagon:

Graphic: X Post

Graphic: X Post

Croke isn’t alone:

Graphic: X Post

Graphic: X Post

Doxxing and interfering locally isn’t nearly enough for this crowd:

As I reported on Friday, over the past week, Democrats on the House Oversight Committee, Illinois Governor JB Pritzker, former Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot, New York Attorney General Letitia James, and even a student group at Loyola University Chicago have proposed the creation of a nationwide database that would track the locations and movements of ICE and CBP agents across the country.

Never mind that providing real-time information to the public about the whereabouts and activities of federal law enforcement officers would place a target on their backs. It would thwart their ability to carry out the Trump administration’s mass deportation efforts, which is the Democrats’ primary objective.

It’s an objective designed to thwart the American people’s will. Article VI, Clause 6 of the Constitution, the Supremacy Clause, states:

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

Federal immigration law, and the laws empowering federal agents to enforce federal law, supercede all local and state laws. The states have no power to impede, obstruct or arrest federal officers in the performance of their duties.

Would local and state police officers obey illegal orders to arrest federal immigration officers? Some Democrat true believers, others who want to keep their pensions, and some mistakenly thinking they’re legally justified, will. Disastrous shootouts between local, state and federal officers are becoming increasingly possible.

To avoid that, the DOJ must immediately apply existing federal law:

The U.S. Justice Department has the ability under 8 U.S Code § 1324 to criminally prosecute any person, including state and local officials, who violate federal immigration law or otherwise attempt to obstruct justice; such persons are not protected by sovereign immunity from federal prosecution. Civil lawsuits can also be filed under the Supremacy Clause when state or local laws directly violate federal immigration statutes or impose “an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives of Congress” in federal immigration laws.

Democrats would scream bloody murder, but to prevent the murder of federal agents lawfully doing their duty, it has become necessary to prosecute anyone, including mayors and governors, who violate federal law by putting federal agents and their families in deadly danger. Granted, leftist judges in those jurisdictions may engage in the kind of lawfare they’re applying to President Trump’s lawful actions, but that can be addressed in other ways.

If we’re to remain a nation under the Constitution and rule of law, what choice do we have?

Become a subscriber and get our weekly, Friday newsletter with unique content from our editors. These essays alone are worth the cost of the subscription.

Mike McDaniel is a USAF veteran, classically trained musician, Japanese and European fencer, life-long athlete, firearm instructor, retired police officer and high school and college English teacher. He is a published author and blogger. His home blog is Stately McDaniel Manor.

Extra Information:

8 U.S. Code § 1324: Federal statute criminalizing the harboring of undocumented immigrants, relevant to state officials obstructing ICE.
Heritage Foundation Analysis: Explains constitutional conflicts between federal and state immigration policies.

People Also Ask About:

  • Can states legally block federal immigration enforcement? No, under the Supremacy Clause, federal law takes precedence.
  • What penalties do officials face for obstructing ICE? Prosecution under 8 U.S. Code § 1324, including fines or imprisonment.
  • Why are Democrats tracking ICE agents? Allegedly to monitor enforcement actions, but critics argue it endangers officers.
  • Has the DOJ prosecuted state officials for immigration interference? Not yet, but legal precedent supports such actions.

Expert Opinion:

Constitutional scholars warn that state-level resistance to federal immigration enforcement could trigger unprecedented legal crises, including injunctions against governors and potential invocation of the Insurrection Act if violence erupts between law enforcement agencies.

Key Terms:

  • Federal immigration enforcement conflicts
  • Supremacy Clause and state laws
  • ICE agent doxxing dangers
  • 8 U.S. Code § 1324 prosecutions
  • Mass deportation legal battles



ORIGINAL SOURCE:

Source link

Search the Web