Stu Bykofsky: Sanctuary cities plan to defy immigration law, still

Philadelphia City Solicitor Renee Garcia testifies about "Trump preparedness." Photo by Ta'Liyah Thomas | Philadelphia City Council Philadelphia City Solicitor Renee Garcia testifies about "Trump preparedness." Photo by Ta'Liyah Thomas | Philadelphia City Council

I see a strange, unlikely parallel between the promise of churches to resist deportation of “migrants” (correct term, illegal residents) and the action of churches 60 years ago to protect civil rights protestors.

The crucial difference is the civil rights protestors of yore were trying to demand federal law, while today’s resistors are trying to break federal law, specifically immigration law.

As always, the Open Border types — and that’s what they are when they “protect” illegals from lawful removal — frame their argument in terms of “protecting the immigrant community.”

As stated, that is a lie. And it is a lie aided and abetted by the mainstream media, which decades ago decided to cancel the word “illegal” in their coverage of immigration. 

They commingle legal and illegal, which has led to an unfortunate result: the declining number of Americans who favor immigration, because they associate it with something bad. In fact, sadly, a majority of Americans want less immigration, according to polling by Gallup.

That is tragic for a nation of immigrants. 

The immigrant community is overwhelmingly composed of people who came here legally — they waited their turn, they paid their fees. They do not need “protection,” because they have done nothing wrong. 

The Inquirer among other news outlets fill their pages with red herrings when they write about “fear in the immigrant community.”

That is a fear-mongering half-truth. There is “fear” among those here illegally, and there should be. With Donald J. Trump as president, some of them may be deported, starting with those already with criminal records. 

I’ll admit, however, some legal immigrants also are fearful, largely thanks to the hysteria fanned by the media. With rare exception, everyone here with a green card is legal and is in no danger.

Across the nation, sanctuary entities — cities like Philadelphia, states like California — are conjuring up ways to thwart the legal efforts by the U.S. government to expel people who do not belong here. And it’s not because it’s Trump. They also thwarted efforts by President Barack Obama.

The Left will portray Trump’s plans as monstrous, evil, and inhumane, cooked up by Republicans. They will not want you to know that Democrat Obama deported more illegals than any other President since 2000, more than Republicans George W. Bush and Trump in his first term.

And Obama did that before the tsunami of illegals arriving here as the result of President Joe Biden essentially ending border enforcement. Biden’s intentions may have been laudable, but he did encourage law-breaking and that, along with the economy, led to the Democrats’ failure to hold the White House.

The Democrats have a tin ear. They are not hearing that after decades of complacency, Americans have reached the end of the rope when it comes to illegal movement across our borders. When the flood gets bad enough, even the mayor of staunchly liberal New York City has screamed “Enough!” as his city faces bankruptcy because of the costs to “protect” illegals.

Here in Philly, Mayor Cherelle Parker continues to refuse to answer straight up if Philly will remain a sanctuary city. At a City Council hearing Wednesday, city solicitor Renee Garcia said the current policy remains in place. The current policy is noncooperation with feds seeking to enforce the law.

But she is not the mayor.

And the Inquirer story, as usual, focuses entirely on the “migrants” plight, but did not have a single word from anyone supporting the planned removal of illegals.

Way back during the mayoral campaign, I asked the mayor by email if she endorses the current executive order prohibiting cooperation with the feds. No response. Just a few months ago, I asked the mayor if Philly would be willing to accept more “migrants” if New York or other sanctuaries turned them away.

No response from her through her press office.

Maybe she’s too busy achieving the impossible dream of learning to spell E-A-G-L-E-S.

Some government officials, such as Illinois billionaire governor JB Pritzker, has said, in effect, the government will arrest “my people” over his dead body. Democrats, who place empathy over legality, break out in hives when exposed to laws they don’t like. American law should not be a buffet where you can pick and choose what you like. If you feel a law is unjust, there are many ways to change it — through the courts, through legislation, through public opinion. 

Church leaders also have threatened resistance to lawful orders of the government.

That brings me back to the civil rights era.

When local officials, or “outsiders” such as the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., broke the law, such as sitting in at segregated lunch counters, they were arrested and went to jail. That’s where King wrote his memorable “Letter from Birmingham Jail.”

Probably many local religious and political officials are willing to go to jail.

I hope they do. They might learn something new, like consequences of illegal action, and a cheese sandwich on white is not an ideal dinner. 

Both sides are fond of saying no one is above the law.

Let’s put it to the test.

Anyone interfering with law enforcement should be jailed. That goes for the clergy as well as politicians.

Stu Bykofsky’s work may be found at StuBykofsky.com, where this piece was originally published.

email icon

Subscribe to our mailing list:

5 thoughts on “Stu Bykofsky: Sanctuary cities plan to defy immigration law, still”

  1. Withhold federal funding and start arresting politicians for harboring illegal aliens – a felony. It’ll stop overnight.

  2. So the president is allowed to openly defy congressional laws and the constitution by issuing executive orders (from the congressionally passed tiktok ban to congress’s control over spending to firing inspectors general to the 14th amendment) but local governments are the problem? Give us a break and write about what’s really going on for once.

  3. “Both sides are fond of saying no one is above the law.” – And one side is above the law.

    Mr. Bykofsky is an equal-opportunity offender. He will write columns for and against the same subject to get clicks. He is frequently factually incorrect, gets offended, and threatens anyone who points out his errors. Even to the point of deleting comments and blocking people on his blog. His outrage and bravado are nothing more than the act of an 81-year-old man yelling at clouds.

Leave a (Respectful) Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *