Prosecute sanctuary officials who defy Trump’s deportation orders

"Cancel me, because I’m going to protect the people of this city."  

Those were the defiant words of New York City’s Mayor Eric Adams as he threw down the gauntlet to liberal activists who are determined to wage war against President-elect Donald Trump’s plan to deport illegal immigrants. On Thursday, he met with Trump’s incoming border czar Tom Homan to discuss ways to evict those who have committed crimes.  

"Hats off to the mayor for coming to the table and working with us," said Homan afterward.   

TOM HOMAN WARNS KNOWINGLY HARBORING ILLEGAL MIGRANTS VIOLATES LAW

It was quite the about-face for the leader of the biggest metropolis in America. There was a time, not so long ago, that Adams extolled the city’s sanctuary status. He endorsed President Joe Biden’s ruinous open borders policy and welcomed undocumented people who crossed the southern border.  

Then, the harsh reality and pernicious truth set in.  

The city was inundated with more than half a million migrants. The financial and logistical burden was overwhelming and unsustainable. Violent crimes soared. The crisis, said Adams last year, "will destroy New York City." Predictably, his pleas for help from the Biden White House went unheeded.  

It is no wonder then that Adams is reversing course. Other big-city mayors and blue-state governors who vow to block Trump’s plan should take note. They have no legal right to provide sanctuary. They are either oblivious to the law or mistakenly believe that they are above it and untouchable.  

Such conceit must soon face a reckoning. With criminal indictments, if necessary.  

Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson promised that police in his city would not work with federal immigration officials to remove illegal migrants and would continue to shield them. Not to be outdone, his state’s governor, J.B. Pritzker, pompously warned, "You come for my people, you come through me." Lately, he’s had second thoughts.  

Denver Mayor Mike Johnston boasted that he intended to mobilize police to stop federal officials from deporting illegals. Then, while trying to walk back his threat, he insisted he would still resist Trump’s planned deportation program and was "not afraid" of going to jail.   

Prosecution and jail are precisely what Congress had in mind when it long ago passed a criminal law to combat those who aid and abet illegal immigration: 

"Any person who ... knowing that an alien has come to the U.S. in violation of law, conceals, harbors, or shields from detection such alien in any place … shall be imprisoned not more than 5 years." (8 USC 1324) 

That’s five years "for each alien." But there’s more.  

It is a felony to "interrupt, hinder, or impede" federal officers in the discharge of their duties. (8 USC 372) It also constitutes obstruction of justice under a variety of statutes in the U.S. Criminal Codes. 

As they grandstand with their grandiose rhetoric, these elected officials seem unaware that they must conform their own conduct to the requirements of the law. They delude themselves into thinking that their lofty positions somehow elevate them above it all.  

The removal of non-citizens for violating immigration laws is exclusively a federal power, as the U.S. Supreme Court has consistently affirmed. While states cannot be compelled to enforce federal laws, they may not lawfully interfere in their execution by federal authorities.  

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently reiterated that the federal government has authority under the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution to deport non-citizens even as local or state leaders try to disrupt the process. This was an obvious ruling, even for the notoriously liberal appellate court.  

Sanctuary devotees are not alone in their ignorance of the law. Unsurprisingly, many in the media are equally clueless and feel no reticence at misinforming their audiences.   

Recently on a CNN primetime program, the host declared with confidence that "the military is not allowed to deport illegal immigrants." Her guest took it a step further by claiming they "cannot be used against the will of local officials or the state government." 

Oh, really? Try fact-checking yourself. 

First of all, Trump told Time magazine that the National Guard would support (key word) deportation, "according to the laws of our country." On Thursday, Homan explained that any deployment would be for logistical assistance only, but that "a sworn immigration officer with immigration authority will be making those arrests." 

Second, journalists and pundits badly misunderstand the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, which bars certain members of the armed forces from participating in civilian law enforcement except when expressly authorized. Indeed, the principal exception is that the president is empowered to deploy the military to enforce or help carry out federal law.  

Historical precedence is instructive. In 1957, President Dwight Eisenhower sent U.S. troops to Little Rock, Arkansas, to enforce federal desegregation laws after Governor Orval Faubus enlisted the state militia to prevent nine African American students from entering Central High School. Faubus was stopped by the federal military.   

Six years later, President John F. Kennedy utilized his executive authority by federalizing the state National Guard to integrate the University of Alabama. Facing arrest by the military for obstruction and contempt-of-court, Governor George Wallace grudgingly backed down from his attempt to interfere.  

In Mississippi, segregationist Governor Ross Barnett did interfere and regretted the consequences. He was tried, convicted, and sentenced to jail for contempt, although he never served time behind bars because he belatedly complied with court orders.  

There are, of course, potent tactics short of arrest to force today’s recalcitrant officials to abide by federal deportation laws and executive orders. The most coercive method is the withholding of federal dollars to sanctuary cities and states. 

The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 requires states and municipalities to cooperate with federal authorities on immigration requests: 

A "State, or local government entity or official may not prohibit, or in any way restrict…sending to, or receiving from, the Immigration and Naturalization Service information regarding the citizenship or immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of any individual. (8 USC 1373) 

That same law empowers a president to withhold federal financial support from cities and states that thwart the law by ignoring detainer requests. It also includes the failure to honor outstanding deportation orders.  

Citing the above statute, the Department of Justice issued a report declaring that the policies and practices of sanctuary jurisdictions violate federal law and can be deprived of federal funds.  

Once in office, Trump should take aggressive action to suspend indefinitely those critical monies. Federal purse strings are powerful leverage. 

What would that mean? Let’s consider the city of San Francisco, which threatens to resist Trump’s planned deportations. It stands to lose hundreds of millions of dollars in federal support that could bust its budget deficit beyond $1 billion.    

But SF’s financial woes pale in comparison to the state’s projected $58 billion deficit that has ballooned under Democrat Governor Gavin Newsom’s liberal spend-a-thon. The cost of housing and feeding California’s nearly 2 million illegal aliens runs more than $20 billion per year. It is untenable.  

And yet, Newsom arrogantly clings to his Trump deportation defiance.  

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

Numerous polls show that a majority of Americans are fed up. They endorse a policy of mass deportation for immigrants living in the country illegally, particularly those who have committed crimes and others with existing deportation orders.  

There are more than 660,000 non-citizens convicted or charged with a crime, according to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). This includes homicides, sex crimes, assault, burglary, and drug offenses. There are over 7 million who have final orders of removal or are going through removal proceedings but are not yet in ICE custody.   

Citizens are now demanding results. This gives the newly elected president the political and electoral capital to remedy the crisis that his predecessor deliberately created.  

If sanctuary officials are not compelled to cooperate by an immense loss of federal funds, Trump’s incoming Department of Justice should bring criminal actions against mayors and governors who are determined to defy federal law.  

Arrests and prosecutions may be the solution of last resort. But, as Democrats kept reminding us over the last four years, no one is above the law in our system of justice. 

It is time to prove it. 

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM GREGG JARRETT