Monday’s New York Times continued the paper’s campaign against enforcing America’s immigration laws with an histrionic editorial, “Proud to Be a Sanctuary City.” Some excerpts from the Editorial Board’s preening:
“If the next president’s immigration agenda includes a pitched battle over ‘sanctuary’ cities… the proper response from places like New York will be: bring it on.
The word ‘sanctuary’ as Mr. Trump deploys it — a place where immigrant criminals run amok, shielded from the long arm of federal law — is grossly misleading, because cities with ‘sanctuary’ policies cannot obstruct federal enforcement and do not try to. Instead, they do what they can to welcome and support immigrants, including the unauthorized, and choose not to participate in deportation crackdowns they see as unjust, self-defeating and harmful to public safety.
New York City wears that kind of ‘sanctuary’ label proudly. As California considers bold steps to shield its residents from a possible Trump immigration assault…
Whatever form the purge takes, the sanctuary forces will have to be resolute in opposition.”
Mexican billionaire Carlos Slim is getting a good return on his investment in the financially troubled Times. Slim, the owner of Mexico’s telephone monopoly, continues to receive hundreds of millions of dollars from the sale of phone cards and remittances by illegals [“unauthorized immigrants” in Times-speak] as long as his hirelings at the Times can help keep the borders open.
The Times writers try to deceive their readers with warm and fuzzy words suggesting that “sanctuary” policies are nothing more than welcoming and supporting immigrants. Sanctuary policies are, in fact, specific legal directives to local law enforcement to withhold information and cooperation from federal immigration agents. These policies only involve aliens who have been arrested by local police. Sanctuary policies direct local authorities to release criminal aliens despite requests by federal immigration agents to hold the criminal alien until they can be picked up and deported. Sanctuary rules violate federal law (8 USC Section 1373) which prohibits any agency from restraining the exchange of information among federal, state and local agencies regarding the immigration status of an individual.
In many cases, criminal aliens released by sanctuary cities go on to commit crimes against innocent Americans. Over 800,000 criminal aliens run free in the U.S. today, but that fact does make it into the Times editorial.
The concluding paragraph of the editorial illustrates the clever dishonesty of the Times. “One good thing: New York and its allies…will have the public on their side.” The writers then cite a poll showing public opposition to ending Obama’s DACA program which shields illegal aliens brought here as children from deportation. So after writing an editorial about sanctuary policies that only protect criminal aliens without ever revealing that fact, they cite an opinion survey having nothing to do with sanctuary cities to prove the public agrees with them.
If you care to read the entire editorial: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/18/opinion/proud-to-be-a-sanctuary-city.html?_r=0