[posted by Justin Levine]

From the San Francisco Chronicle -

San Francisco will shift course and start turning over juvenile illegal immigrants convicted of felonies to federal authorities for possible deportation, Mayor Gavin Newsom said Wednesday as he took the blame for what he conceded was a costly and misguided effort to shield the youths.

Newsom said he hadn’t known until recently that the city was keeping the juvenile offenders from being deported as part of its sanctuary-city policy, but he added that “ignorance is no defense.”

…

Newsom had said Tuesday that he had no direct authority to order the change, but that did little to dispel a controversy that overshadowed his announcement this week that he was exploring a 2010 run for governor. National media coverage of the mayor in recent days focused not on his political ambitions but on Chronicle revelations that his city was harboring illegal immigrant youths who had been convicted of dealing crack on the streets.

…

The mayor also revealed some of the costs to San Francisco taxpayers of protecting the offenders from the federal government, something his Juvenile Probation Department had declined to do.

The city has spent $2.3 million just to house illegal immigrants in juvenile hall rather than turning them over to federal authorities since 2005, the year Newsom appointed his juvenile probation director, William Siffermann.

Oh, there’s much more. Read it all.  This is the man who wants to be Governor of California….

Meanwhile, I’d simply recommend a retaliation policy. Upon their release from jail or prison, all cities should promptly dump their violent offenders, drug dealers and homeless in San Francisco until that city becomes unlivable. Maybe that will drive the point home. It might be harsh, but this is war, and San Francisco clearly started it.

[posted by Justin Levine]

The San Francisco Chronicle continues to do a stellar job in keeping on top of this important story.

The latest -

San Francisco — With his handpicked juvenile probation chief at his side, San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom said today that he is powerless to order that the city turn over underage illegal immigrant criminals to federal officials for deportation.

Instead, Newsom said at a City Hall news conference, the question of what to do with illegal immigrant minors who deal drugs and commit other crimes is one for juvenile court judges, the district attorney and public defender to sort out.

“I don’t have the authority here,” Newsom said as he stood beside Juvenile Probation Director William Siffermann. “I have a bully pulpit. The courts have the authority here.”

Keep in mind that this is the same mayor who somehow determined on his own that he did have the authority to wed same-sex partners without previous court authority. Very rich indeed….

Read the whole thing from the Chronicle here.

 [posted by Justin Levine]

Here is a startling update to the already outrageous story that was posted about earlier this morning -

SAN FRANCISCO — An effort by San Francisco to shield eight young Honduran crack dealers from federal immigration officials backfired when the youths escaped from Southern California group homes within days of their arrival, officials said Monday.

The walkaways are the latest in a string of embarrassments for city officials, who are protecting illegal alien drug dealers from federal authorities and possible deportation because of San Francisco’s 1989 declaration that the city is a sanctuary for undocumented immigrants.

I have to take issue with the wording of the first sentence in the story. San Francisco’s efforts to shield illegal alien crack dealers from federal immigration officials most obviously did not “backfire” as the report states…The city’s efforts worked only too well.   After all, you don’t see them in federal custody, do ya?

‘After all, if we did that, it might end up interfering with this nation’s higher priority to completely ignore its immigration laws.’

Ok. That wasn’t an exact quote. But that is what was said, in essence.

Unbelievable -

San Francisco juvenile probation officials - citing the city’s immigrant sanctuary status - are protecting Honduran youths caught dealing crack cocaine from possible federal deportation and have given some offenders a city-paid flight home with carte blanche to return.

The city’s practices recently prompted a federal criminal investigation into whether San Francisco has been systematically circumventing U.S. immigration law, according to officials with knowledge of the matter.

[posted by Justin Levine]

This image, currently on the main L.A. Times web page, is far from subtle:

It’s not an easy issue. I feel terrible for this poor little girl in the photo. And if her dad isn’t otherwise a criminal, I think the government is misplacing its resources by tossing him out, while claiming a lack of resources to deport every illegal immigrant who has committed a crime.

But a rank appeal to sympathy like this is misplaced, when it is not counterbalanced by providing the whole picture.

I have documented countless examples of people killed by illegal immigrants who should have been deported, but were not. Here is a collection of the first ten in one post.

It would be child’s play to write an article about these victims’ families.

You might even be able to snap a picture of one of them crying.

You’ll never see that in the L.A. Times.

[posted by Justin Levine]

Perhaps he is too bashful to admit it, but Patterico’s favorite newspaper labels him as a “prominent Angeleno” in today’s edition which asks several people their views on Special Order 40 in Los Angeles. (His actual views on the subject are well worth reading too - apart from the side issue of what he is labeled as.)

[Justin Levine]

The L.A. Times’s Sunday Opinion section has a special feature titled 40 on 40. The title refers to 40 people discussing Special Order 40, which restricts LAPD’s ability to enforce federal immigration laws. Or, as the deck headline explains: “Forty prominent Angelenos and Southern Californians sound off about policing, illegal immigrants and the LAPD.”

Make that 39 prominent Angelenos and Southern Californians . . . and me.

I was asked to keep my contribution to 40 words. Stick out your index finger and start poking the computer screen as you count the words to see how close I came:

Patrick “Patterico” Frey, blogger at Patterico’s Pontifications

Jamiel Shaw would be alive today if we deported every illegal immigrant in County Jail. Instead, immigration authorities screen only 6% of L.A. jail inmates. The best “Jamiel’s Law” would prioritize deporting criminals, by assigning more immigration agents to jails.

(Remember: L.A. counts as only one word!)

Read it all. It’s an interesting set of viewpoints. It’s good that people are paying attention to the issue.

Too bad for Jamiel Shaw that we weren’t paying more attention before.

[Guest post by DRJ]

It looks like Hillary Clinton has joined the Deport the Criminals First society but you won’t believe her version:

“Alice Hardcastle, 40, told Clinton that her 18-year daughter, Elace, was killed two years ago in “an automobile accident at the hands of a foreigner.”

“He didn’t get any kind of hard punishment which is OK with me now, it wasn’t then but it is now,” she said. “I want to know what your view is on the immigration.”

After expressing her thanks and sorrow, Clinton answered with the same five-point answer that virtually every advocate of “comprehensive immigration reform,” including all the Democratic frontrunners gives: A litany of tough-sounding measures, followed by a riff on the sheer impracticality of mass deportation, the safety value of forcing immigrants to “register,” and, quietly at the end, a plan for legalization.

The question was so raw, and the tough talk in Clinton’s answer seemed particularly fierce, particularly on the point of deporting illegal immigrant criminals.

“If they commiteed a crime…we have to deport them immediately, no questions asked, no legal process,” she said. “You put them on a plane to wherever they came from.”

Hardcastle said Clinton had told her what she wanted to hear. She said she agreed that mass deportation would simply be too expensive, and that her focus was on deporting those who “do bad things.” They hugged, and Clinton told Hardcastle that the mother’s decision to forgive the driver has “choked her up,” Hardcastle said.”

I’m not sure what to think of this anecdote. First, it is not what I expect from a Democrat, especially one with Hillary’s background who is committed to legal process. Second, I can’t find other reports of this incident except the Politico link.

Was this a real quote from Hillary Clinton? It’s so surprising that it almost seems like a joke but if it did happen, this is big news.

UPDATE 12/22/2007: Hillary’s questioner was identified as Alice Hardcastle and this event apparently occurred in Tipton IA. Mrs. Hardcastle’s discussion with Hillary concerned the death of her daughter, Elace Hardcastle, at the hands of a “foreigner.”

Here’s an article on the death of Elace Hardcastle. Elace died two years ago in Coral Gables FL where she apparently lived. She was one of several teenage passengers in a car that veered out of control due to high speed. The driver, a male teenager named Kristien Rodriguez, was apparently charged with recklessness in the death of Elace and his passengers but there’s nothing in the article or that I can find elsewhere that suggests Rodriguez was a legal or illegal immigrant. Of course, that’s not dispositive since his legal status may not have been an issue if the community is a sanctuary city, but it’s hard to see how Rodriguez’s status had anything to do with Elace’s death.

– DRJ

Posted by WLS

There  Campaign Standard blog links to an New Yorker article by Ryan Lizza which concerns the idea that the illegal immigration issue is, to some degree, being driven by a few small states that have suffered an unusually high level of illegal hispanic immigration, and that fact has created a political environment on that subject which is out of proportion to the way the large majority of American’s view the problem.  Here’s a passage taken from the article by the blog post:

Anti-immigrant passion also owes much to the disproportionate influence of a few small states in the nominating process. National polls show that, as an issue, immigration is far behind the Iraq war, terrorism, the economy, and health care as a concern to most Americans; a recent Pew poll shows that, nationally, only six per cent of voters offer immigration as the most important issue facing the country. But in Iowa and South Carolina, two of the three most important early states, it is a top concern for the Republicans who are most likely to vote. “It’s the influx of illegals into places where they’ve never seen a Hispanic influence before,” McCain told me. “You probably see more emotion in Iowa than you do in Arizona on this issue. I was in a town in Iowa, and twenty years ago there were no Hispanics in the town. Then a meatpacking facility was opened up. Now twenty per cent of their population is Hispanic. There were senior citizens there who were—‘concerned’ is not the word. They see this as an assault on their culture, what they view as an impact on what have been their traditions in Iowa, in the small towns in Iowa. So you get questions like ‘Why do I have to punch 1 for English?’ ‘Why can’t they speak English?’ It’s become larger than just the fact that we need to enforce our borders.”

(more…)

[“Deport the Criminals First” is a recurring feature on this blog, highlighting crimes committed by illegal immigrants — with a special focus on repeat offenders. I argue that, instead of arresting illegal immigrants who work hard for a living, we should use our limited immigration enforcement resources to target illegal immigrants who commit crimes in this country.]

Back in March, in discussing the Great U.S. Attorneys Firing Scandal, I noted U.S. Attorney Paul Charlton’s overly restrictive guidelines regarding the prosecution of illegal re-entry cases.

I knew at the time that this policy probably cost lives.

Now I have evidence of it.

In my March post, I noted an e-mail in which a Bush Administration official complained:

When I was in Phoenix with Jon, we met with USA Paul Charlton. Charlton told us that his office didn’t prosecute illegal aliens until they were apprehended 13 times (after the initial removal order). His exceptions to that “policy” were: aliens with aggravated felonies; alien smugglers with 12 or more people; and aliens who cross the border illegally with children not their own.

I remarked:

No, that’s not a typo. It says “13 times.” Illegal re-entry prosecutions required 13 apprehensions after the initial removal order.

Jumpin’ Jehoshaphat, Batman!

If that doesn’t amaze you, you’re beyond being amazed.

Here’s how that policy may have killed a man named Ivan Santos. From a September 13, 2007 KTAR.com story:

An illegal immigrant who’s been deported five times will be facing the death penalty for a Phoenix murder.

Now that’s a good lede.

Demetro Acosta-Uribe is accused of shooting Ivan Santos to death earlier this year.

According to police reports, Santos’ body was found in May 2007 in the front yard of a west Phoenix home. The victim had been shot to death after he was bound and his head covered in plastic wrap.

Two other men were also found on the property, restrained in the same manner. Neither had been shot, but one of the victims would have suffocated had a neighbor not rescued him.

Police allege Santos was shot and killed as he tried to escape.

The Maricopa County Attorney’s office says the case is an example of how wide open borders expose the Valley to violent crime.

Andrew Thomas said the government’s continuing failure to control the border has made Maricopa County residents vulnerable to violence.

Acosta-Uribe is a citizen of Mexico and had been deported five times.

The last deportation took place on May 7, 2004. He was also deported Nov. 21, 2003; Sept. 18, 1997; July 9, 1993; and April 29, 1998.

Jeez . . . with all of these deportations, you’d think the feds might have prosecuted him for illegal re-entry and tossed him in prison. Might have saved someone’s life, huh? I bet you’re wondering why that didn’t happen.

It all comes together when you realize that Paul Charlton was the U.S. Attorney who had jurisdiction over Phoenix from November 6, 2001 until December 19, 2006. Accordingly, he was the U.S. Attorney at the time of Acosta-Uribe’s last two deportations in 2003 and 2004 — and who, apparently, failed to prosecute Acosta-Uribe for illegal re-entry.

Demetro Acosta-Uribe shouldn’t have been free, in this country, after he was apprehended by immigration officials in 2003 or 2004. He should have been prosecuted for illegal re-entry, and sent to federal prison.

If he had been prosecuted by Paul Charlton — instead of simply deported pursuant to ridiculously lenient filing guidelines — maybe he would have been locked up, instead of committing murder.

Still think the U.S. Attorney firings were contrived? Still think they were over nothing?

Tell Ivan Santos.

I guess I’m on a bit of a tear tonight on the illegal immigration issue — but stories like this will do that to you.

From the L.A. Times:

On Oct. 10, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in Medellin vs. Texas. If Medellin and the Bush administration prevail, California may be forced to reconsider the death sentences for several dozen Mexican nationals at San Quentin.

This is, of course, noted merely in passing, in an article that focuses primarily on the cases the Supreme Court will hear this term.

The idea that California is housing several dozen Mexican nationals on Death Row . . . well, there’s no story in that!

Every last one of them represents at least one murdered soul.

Bo-ring! Is there anything new on Britney?

P.S. Do you have any idea how many hoops the state must jump through to get someone on Death Row? Believe me, for every murderer on Death Row, there are many, many, many more serving standard life sentences, or less.

Starting to see the problem yet??

Via See Dubya comes a lengthy article regarding a case I first told you about here, in which an illegal alien drunk driver crushed a woman’s legs:

For 10 days in March, Lucio Rodriguez sat in a Santa Clara County jail cell on a misdemeanor count of driving drunk.

Rodriguez, who authorities say has been living in the United States illegally, told jail officials he wasn’t a citizen - a red flag for immigration agents - but they never met with him to begin the deportation process, and he was released.

Six months later, on Sept. 9, the 27-year-old was arrested in Los Gatos, on suspicion of driving drunk, again - but this time, authorities say, it was after he slammed into mother Sara Cole outside her vehicle, crushing her legs and nearly killing her.

The article details how sanctuary policies, and the lack of ICE personnel in local jails, combine to allow aliens to slip through the cracks of the system and create havoc.

Read it all.