Tom Stiglich
Richard Kosich: A profile in cowardice — why Montgomery County rejected ICE cooperation
Neil Makhija and Jamila Winder, the chair and vice chair of the Montgomery County Board of Commissioners, respectively, recently penned an opinion article to the Inquirer published on May 14th outlining their rationale for rejecting the signing of a 287(g) agreement with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the federal agency tasked with enforcing the nation’s immigration laws.
Far from providing a coherent justification for their actions, however, the article is sadly a profile in cowardice and only proves that the Commissioners’ actions are a dereliction of duty to the citizens of Montgomery County.
Their messaging is also unmistakable: Montgomery County will provide cover for illegal aliens by effectively shielding them from Federal law enforcement and thus endangering the public’s safety in the process.
Where to begin?
The best place to start is with Makhija and Winder’s egregiously indefensible rationale for not signing an agreement with ICE, which they claim is rooted in “constitutional principle, public safety, and fiscal responsibility.”
Regarding “constitutional principle,” they are actually correct in stating that “the president cannot draft state and local officials into implementing federal policy” in the way a military draft works. However, the President can use various tools at his disposal, such as federal mandates, funding and executive orders to encourage or even require state and local governments to implement federal laws and policies of the President’s administration.
One such tool is the Take Care Clause, which is found in Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution and states that “[the President] shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States” to assist in that duty. This clause has been interpreted as giving the President broad authority to take steps “as he shall judge necessary and expedient” to ensure federal laws are followed, including working with state and local officials, as opposed to drafting them.
For example, on Inauguration Day, President Trump issued an executive order titled “Protecting the American People Against Invasion,” which required ICE to continue authorizing state and local police to assist in immigration enforcement. The authority here stems implicitly from the President’s duty to enforce criminal statutes of the United States under the Take Care Clause.
State and local police are therefore acting as commissioned Officers of the United States via ICE’s authority granted to it by the President himself under Section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). And 287(g) agreements, in particular, are the official mechanism by which ICE delegates to state and local law enforcement officers the authority to perform specified immigration functions under the agency’s direction and oversight.
Participation in the 287(g) program is limited to local law enforcement agencies (LEAs) that enter into memorandums of agreement (MOA) with ICE as mandated by state legislation and statutes. Only LEAs that voluntarily sign an MOA with ICE are eligible for the 287(g) program, thus proving that local officials don’t have to be drafted into implementing federal policy — they can do it willingly.
Makhija and Winder also claim that 287(g) agreements make communities less safe by somehow undermining community trust that police need “to pursue justice effectively for all residents,” although they fail to provide any evidence to support this claim. Instead, they offer up the same old tired tropes about how immigrants are less likely to commit crimes (regardless of status), and that they are less willing to call police or emergency services out of fear when our immigration laws are enforced.
Makhija and Winder’s rationale essentially implies that sanctuary jurisdictions like Montgomery County are better off shielding dangerous, criminal illegal aliens from prosecution so that otherwise “law-abiding” illegal immigrants feel safe reporting those criminals back to the very same people protecting them in the first place! That, to the liberal mind, makes sense?
What Makhija and Winder fail to comprehend is that since many of the most dangerous illegal aliens often live amongst large immigrant communities themselves, their intended victims are thus more likely to originate from that population as well. Take for example Josue Osorio-Quino, a twice-deported illegal alien who fatally stabbed his girlfriend in front of her children on Christmas morning in 2019. “This case is a microcosm, an example of the consequences of being a sanctuary jurisdiction,” acting U.S. Attorney William M. McSwain said at the time. “Even one crime committed by an illegal alien is a crime that can be prevented.”
Unfortunately, Makhija and Winder are apparently oblivious to examples of preventable tragedies like this, of which there are many more. Instead, their biggest self-professed fear appears to be centered around fictitious traffic stops that “become de facto immigration checks.” Presumably they are referring to the “Task Force” sub-program model of Section 287(g) of the INA, which ICE says “serves as a force multiplier” by providing community police with limited immigration authority. This authority allows local traffic cops, for example, to inquire about someone’s immigration status upon any interaction with law enforcement where probable cause is shown.
Commissioners Makhija and Winder, however, believe this simple inquiry amounts to a federal crime, and somehow makes us “less safe.” But according to ICE’s own website, the 287(g) Program enhances the safety and security of our nation’s communities by “allowing ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) to partner with state and local law enforcement agencies to identify and remove criminal aliens” who “undermine the safety of our nation’s communities and the integrity of U.S. immigration laws.”
Bucks County Sheriff Fred Harran agrees, stating that it’s been clear throughout his nearly four decades in law enforcement that community safety is best served through collaboration and strategic police deployment. The application to ICE, he said, “is a direct extension of this commitment — a deliberate step to enhance our ability to protect residents by working with federal authorities within the course of our duties.” Sheriff Harran’s department would be the first in the Philadelphia region to collaborate with ICE under the common-sense 287(g) initiative, assuming it survives legal challenges by the ACLU and others.
Makhija and Winder’s last justification for not signing a 287(g) agreement concerns “fiscal responsibility,” in which they claim, “This administration‘s mass deportation plan would cost nearly $1 trillion over the next decade,” with state and local governments bearing the cost of helping deploy deputized agents — although they fail to provide any evidence to back up this claim. They also argue that any money spent on immigration enforcement could be better spent funding other local priorities, such as expanding mental health services, improving aging infrastructure or strengthening public schools.
While the investment needs in these other public realms are certainly legitimate, the Commissioners undermine their own fiscal argument by boasting that ”we’ve committed $10 million to enhance community centers serving Latino and Asian American and Pacific Islander residents in Norristown and North Wales.” Surely this money could also have been better spent funding those very same critical priorities they cited for not signing a 287(g) agreement. They are also apparently unaware that LEAs which participate in the 287(g) program receive training at the expense of ICE (as related to their prospective immigration enforcement duties), further undermining their argument.
Makhija and Winder conclude their article by stating that “In Montgomery County, we’re committed to upholding the rule of law while protecting the rights of all residents.” But by failing to distinguish between “legal” vs. “illegal” residents here, and granting illegals taxpayer funded services they aren’t entitled to, Makhija and Winder are actually violating the “rule of law” they swore to uphold. And by not signing a 287(g) agreement with ICE, they are jeopardizing Montgomery County residents’ right to safety by shielding potentially dangerous fugitives from deportation as a result of the Commissioners’ unwillingness to partner with ICE to enforce existing immigration law.
Of course, Makhija and Winder aren’t concerned about the potentially negative ramifications of their actions, as they enjoy qualified immunity which protects government officials from civil lawsuits while acting in their official capacity. So victims of illegal immigrant crime have no legal recourse to sue people like Makhija and Winder when a preventable tragedy occurs precipitated by their blatantly misguided policies.
For the public safety’s sake then, it would be helpful if both Neil Makhija and Jamila Winder understand this simple fact: all illegal aliens are removable from the United States whether they have committed other crimes or not. They are, by definition, unlawfully present in the United States and are therefore subject to deportation solely because they lack authorization to be here.
Period. Full stop.
The open borders lobby, however, would have Americans believe that a major civil rights violation has occurred whenever anyone who hasn’t been convicted of an egregious criminal offense is deported. This is utter nonsense. The law simply says that the United States won’t tolerate trespassers within our own borders, regardless of how ‘law-abiding’ illegals may otherwise act once residing here.
To most Americans, that seems like common sense. Unfortunately, to Montgomery County Commissioners Neil Makhija and Jamila Winder, it apparently represents an insurmountable leap of logic. Hopefully it won’t take a preventable tragedy for them to come to alter course and come to their senses. If not, they should be held accountable for their reckless policy position.
Richard F. Kosich is a Grassroots Manager at Americans for Prosperity and Chair of the Conshohocken Borough Republican Committee (CBRC). Opinions are his own.
This article is jut Typical Republican boiler-plate BS. The administration has claimed it is going after the worst of the worst undodumented aliens. In fact, they cannot fine enough people to deport by focusing on criminals and drug dealers, because there are not that many or those. Inastead they have to send ICE after people who are living productive lives, raising families, working hard at jobs Americans won’t touch. They fined them by raiding worksites like car washes, meat-;acking plants etc. and by just pickingf people up in parking lots were hourly workers hang out waiting for employers to drive by looking for people to do day labor, like roofers, fence installers, etc. We don’t need our highly paid cops and FBI agents helping with that kind of nonsense. They should be going after real dangers to the community, arresting them, trying them, ane then having them sentenced. if it makes sense to deport them because they are in the country illegally, then fine, save the dost of imprisoning them.
At this point, believing any Democrat claim about immigration policy is just willful ignorance.
‘They should be going after real dangers to the community, arresting them, trying them, ane then having them sentenced.”
That would take every liberal democrat off the street in this country. Careful what you wish for.
Actually, your response is ‘typical socialist boiler-plate b.s.” And obviously you didn’t make it to the end of the article, so I will quote directly from it for you in response:
“…all illegal aliens are removable from the United States whether they have committed other crimes or not. They are, by definition, unlawfully present in the United States and are therefore subject to deportation solely because they lack authorization to be here.
Period. Full stop.
The open borders lobby, however, would have Americans believe that a major civil rights violation has occurred whenever anyone who hasn’t been convicted of an egregious criminal offense is deported. This is utter nonsense. The law simply says that the United States won’t tolerate trespassers within our own borders, regardless of how ‘law-abiding’ illegals may otherwise act once residing here.
To most Americans, that seems like common sense. Unfortunately, to Montgomery County Commissioners Neil Makhija and Jamila Winder, it apparently represents an insurmountable leap of logic. Hopefully it won’t take a preventable tragedy for them to come to alter course and come to their senses. If not, they should be held accountable for their reckless policy position.”
You may also want to look up “The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA)” as codified in Title 8 of the United States Code. For example, Section 1231(a) imposes a categorical detention mandate, which is reinforced by Section 1231(a)(2) requiring the Government “shall detain [an] alien” “[d]uring the removal period,” often beginning either when an “order of removal becomes administratively final” or when an “alien is released from detention or confinement” not arising from the immigration process itself. And, most importantly, Section 1231(a)(1)(A) commands that the Government “shall remove the alien” within the removal period.
Note the “shall” here; it does not say “may.”
Also look up 8 U.S.C. §1226(c) that directs the Government to “take into custody any alien”…“when the alien is released” from criminal State custody, including when released on “parole, supervised release, or probation” — regardless of a conviction. At that point, a “cooperative” State is supposed to notify DHS so that it can be ready to assume its obligation under sections 1226(a) and (c) to take the alien into federal custody, something that wasn’t happening in many sanctuary jurisdictions under the prior administration and continues even today, like here in Montgomery County.
Recently a vice-mayor of one of the Los Angeles municipalities post on-line a plea for members of the local; street gangs to help with shielding illegal immigrants. Perhaps this is what Bucks County has in mind. It seems
Bucks County Commissioners have no regard for violence perpetrated on citizens by the vicious gangs that are part of illegal migration. I doubt things like an MS-13 gang member hacking a girl to death with a machete to gain “street cred” figure into their algebra. When citizen safety and rule of law come up against their personal ideological agenda, their agenda wins. After all they, unlike their constituents, are shielded from the consequences of their actions and have the happy ability to buff up their ego.
Richard: Your article is way too long. Not a lot of people will read it; and less will find it convincing. The refusal by Montgomery County Commissioners Neil Makhija and Jamila Winder to sign a 287(g) agreement with ICE is a dangerous decision that jeopardizes residents’ safety. Their arguments against the agreement, based on constitutional principles, public safety, and fiscal responsibility, are flawed and they ignore the benefits of removing criminal aliens. By shielding potentially dangerous individuals from deportation, these foolish communist “leaders” risk putting their innocent constituents lives at risk and they are violating the rule of law. It is crucial for them to reconsider their flawed and stupid ideology… and sign the agreement to protect their community and uphold immigration laws, as supported by reasonable law enforcement perspectives.
They won’t. No one cares. Society is collapsing. We stopped enforcing standards. Shame doesn’t matter because people stopped being willing to punch each other in the face. Women wear pants. People are addicted to TV and Netflix.
Finis… Navidad… Xmas… The Solution?
Wish people a Merry Christmas.
To the contrary, the people I’ve shared it with all say it’s very convincing and “solid”, but nobody has said it’s “too long”. In fact, I needed to address all three excuses the Commissioners gave for not signing the 287(g) agreement in legal terms to make the argument convincing, so that required some space to do so. Also, things aren’t as bleak as you make them out to be, as society is recovering from all the woke b.s. over the last 4 years as exemplified by Donald Trump’s stunning come-back and all the recent successes he’s had in the Supreme Court. AND he’s only getting started! The real concern is just how far our left-wing whack job friends are going to take things in opposition to his Presidency. For them, it’s going to be a LONG four years indeed!
I find the concept of tolerating illegal immigration to be desirable because illegal immigrants will do jobs that American won’t touch to be astoundingly racist and elitist. This attitude casts illegal immigrants as fit for only menial jobs which are considered beneath a citizen to perform. It seems almost mediaeval in that it creates a class of serfs who will always be subservient to an upper class of citizens. Mike Rowe has a scholarship program for trades. America has a serious shortage of skill craftsmen because generations have been conned into believing that only a college education provides jobs that satisfy and pay well. It’s time for folks to wake up and realize any work has dignity and paychecks are better than no paychecks. AI is fast eliminating college degree jobs and soon, those made redundant by AI will be looking at immigrants only jobs just to survive.
I have had the misfortune of trying to deal with security at a big box store that had large numbers of illegal day workers. So many problems theft, vehicle damage, toilet misuse, threats, intimidating shoppers into tipping them to carry their purchases to their cars
While I agree with most of what Kosich writes here, I’m also thinking some more courage is in order from not only our minority Repbulcan Commissioner, Tom DiBello, but the author as well. DiBello has quietly been tap dancing around every single one of Winder and Majehka’s leftist policies since he took office. “I voted ‘no'” is not the only role of the minority commissioner; he’s supposed to be representing Republicans, who are in the minority in this county, though their tax dollars are also being (ab)used to advance these leftist policies, while they simultaneously hold press conferences and pen op Ed’s promoting their agenda. Meanwhile, we never hear a full throated opposition to any of these policies from Mr. DiBello, instead he weakly claims he voted no, or he’s got to look into the law, or he hasn’t researched to position yet. Somebody remind me why we voted Joe Gale out and this guy in? As for Kosich, Montgomery County Republican Committee members need to realize that when they fail to call out the shortcomings of their own party members in favor of blind party loyalty, they de-legitimize themselves and the party, and they give a pass to an elected official who weirds tremendous power in the party. In addition to his seat on the County Board, Mr. DiBello is also a Republican Committee Area Leader and Municipal Leader-far too much power for one person to have in the Party. Does the Republican Party stand for ideals or covering for elected leaders when they fall short? Americans have had enough gas lighting from elected leaders and the press, which is why they elected Trump. Grassroots organizations, such as the one Kosich runs, should exercise the courage of their convictions as well, and not cover for politicians just because they hold leadership positions in the Party.
This portion of the article should serve as a much-needed “ah-ha” moment—particularly for those of us who’ve watched, with increasing dismay, the near-collapse of routine traffic enforcement in and around Philadelphia over the past decade.
[Instead of addressing the visible, growing threat of lawlessness on our streets, there seems to be outsized concern—primarily on the political left—about hypothetical traffic stops turning into immigration checks. This fear, often pointed toward Section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, has been used to justify handcuffing local police from doing the most basic part of their jobs: enforcing laws that protect everyday people.]
Let’s be honest. Anyone who drives or walks around Philly can see the decline. The rampant disregard for traffic laws has made our roadways feel chaotic, even dangerous. Collisions, hit-and-runs, and pedestrian deaths have all seen an uptick. And yet, instead of tackling the root causes, policies have been shaped by narratives that often ignore the lived reality of those of us trying to simply get to work, walk our kids to school, or cross a street safely.
What’s even more alarming is that this lack of enforcement isn’t just some unintended byproduct. It’s a direct result of policy decisions—ones fueled by both the anti-police rhetoric and a permissive attitude toward unlawful immigration enforcement. This combination has created a double-bind for law enforcement and placed ordinary, law-abiding citizens in jeopardy.
When did upholding the rule of law become taboo? And more importantly, when did our safety become a negotiable political point?
We must have the courage to question policies—regardless of which side of the aisle champions them—when they begin to erode the very principles of civil order. Compassion, after all, cannot thrive in chaos. And responsible public policy should never sacrifice the well-being of communities in the name of ideological purity.
It’s not a question of left or right, but right and wrong. And it’s time we had that grown-up conversation.