The Justice Department, in a significant reversal applauded by Republicans, has called for an end to so-called “sanctuary cities” where illegal immigrants accused of crimes are harbored by cities and counties that receive federal aid.
In a letter to the chairman of the House Justice appropriations committee, Assistant Attorney General Peter J. Kadzik said that from now on the department will require over 300 sanctuary cities cities, including Washington, D.C., New York and San Francisco, to abide by immigration laws or see their federal funds cut. If they are found to be in violation of federal laws, as in protecting illegal immigrants, Justice will move in with civil or criminal charges.
In his letter to Rep. John A. Culberson, Texas Republican, Kadzik said that he will advise communities that receive federal money that they are “required to assure and certify that they are in compliance with all applicable federal laws, and will continue to be required to do so.”
Culberson, who had been pushing to punish sanctuary cities that defy federal law enforcement demands for access to illegal criminals, called the letter and a supporting statement from Attorney General Loretta Lynch a huge win.
“The new policies the Department of Justice announced today will keep our streets safer by ensuring that criminal aliens do not roam freely in our communities, and prevent federal tax dollars from being sent to jurisdictions that refuse to comply with federal immigration laws,” he said. “I am very grateful to Attorney General Lynch for her leadership in making these vital changes which will save lives and make our streets much safer,” added Culberson.
So did groups pushing for the change. “It’s a big deal,” said Jessica M. Vaughan, director of policy studies for the Center for Immigration Studies. “Now San Francisco, Chicago, NYC, DC and many others will have to choose between federal money and protecting criminal aliens.”
Most had never heard of sanctuary cities until an illegal, deported several times, fatally gunned down a tourist in San Francisco last year. The immigrant was released by the city despite a demand for him from federal authorities.
In his Tuesday letter, Kadzik wrote that “Where the Department of Justice receives a credible allegation that an entity receiving funds under a department grant or reimbursement program has, after assuring or certifying compliance with applicable federal laws, violated a specific federal law, the department can potentially seek criminal or civil enforcement options against the entity.”
At risk to the cities is funding for police, jails and other programs.
Kadzik also sought to reassure Congress that the agency was doing its best to keep criminals off the streets. He said that Justice has implemented new rules “to ensure that criminal aliens are not released onto American streets.” That includes the U.S. Bureau of Prisons offering Immigration and Customs officers criminal illegal immigrants first, not cities that may have a claim on the person.
Vaughan, an expert on the issue who has uncovered over 300 sanctuary cities in a new report, explained the impact:
“What this means is that those jurisdictions that have policies that restrict local officials from contacting ICE or Border Patrol, or that refuse to tell ICE when a criminal alien is being released, or that bar ICE from coming to the jail to interview inmates risk losing certain federal funding. If a jurisdiction is not in compliance with federal law, they will not be able to get federal funds. Now, sanctuary jurisdictions like San Francisco, Chicago, New York City, Washington DC, Montgomery County MD, and many others will have to choose between getting federal funding and protecting criminal aliens, and they will have to explain that choice to their citizens. This is a reasonable and legally sound approach to the sanctuary problem that is based on a section of federal law (8 USC 1373) enacted in 1996, which prohibits state and local governments from restricting communication with ICE and the Border Patrol.”
She also gave credit to Culberson who had earlier promised to use his power of the purse to end the sanctuaries for illegal criminals.
“It’s important to recognize that DOJ has had this authority all along, and should have been using it to prevent the tragedies like Kate Steinle’s death [last summer in San Francisco.] But they refused to do it until one determined committee chair, John Culberson, decided to use his authority over the DOJ budget to make the Obama administration do the right thing. And his committee will be keeping tabs on DOJ by requiring them to do quarterly reports on the implementation of this policy.
“I think this will really make a difference. I know that the families of people who have been harmed by criminal aliens released by sanctuary policies will appreciate it too. Some of the sanctuaries might want to be martyrs and give up their funding, and they will have to be dealt with eventually, but for now at least they won’t be subsidized by US taxpayers,” she told Secrets.
Paul Bedard, the Washington Examiner’s “Washington Secrets” columnist, can be contacted at [email protected].
