If the president wants to unite with conservatives instead of fighting them, it’s time he turns his focus to immigration.
Last week, the nation was stunned by another shocking crime allegedly committed by two illegal aliens from Central America, individuals who are generally categorized as “Dreamers” by their defenders. A 14-year-old girl from Montgomery County, Maryland was allegedly brutally raped in a public-school bathroom by two illegal aliens. One suspect Jose Montano, 17, was from El Salvador, and the other, Sanchez Milian, 18, was from Guatemala. Both were placed in ninth grade with this girl and many other students.
The Baltimore Sun, after conducting extensive interviews with immigration officials, reported the following details:
While certainly not all illegal alien children are brutal rapists, there are far too many problems among them, and they are not all valedictorians in waiting. Most importantly, they have no legal right to be placed in American schools without the consent of the people. So why is this happening? Why are 18-year-old illegal aliens being placed with 14 year-old-girls in ninth grade? Who is paying for the fiscal, cultural, and security problems, and why should we accept this travesty for even one more day?
While the legal and procedural reasons are a bit more complex, the political reasons are simple. The bipartisan mantra of the need to care for “children” and “dreamers” of Central America— a sentiment even expressed on and off by the president himself — is single-handedly responsible for encouraging teenagers or families with children to cross the border. The perception in Central America is that if you come here with children under 18 (or thought to be under 18), the children will be immediately provided for and the parents will never be deported. It is why the promise of “Dream” amnesty and Obama’s illegal DACA program have been so destructive and downright immoral when viewed against the interests of American taxpayers.
As Ian Smith of the Immigration Reform Law Institute observed in 2015, “[F]rom 2012, when DACA was announced, to last year , UAM [Unaccompanied Child Minor] apprehensions increased 490 percent, 444 percent, and 610 percent for El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras, respectively.” He added that “even the Congressional Research Service, the Washington Post, and the Soros-funded Migration Policy Institute have made the link between ending the threat of deportation and the rise in illegal immigration.
That link between incentives and border-crossings was driven home when The El Paso Intelligence Center (EPIC) drafted a memo in 2014 asserting that 95% of the border-crossers interviewed cited the promise of amnesty as the primary factor behind their migration, not violence back home. Their promise turned out to be correct, as only 4% of the Central American teenagers have been deported (as opposed to Mexico, which deported 90 percent of its Central American migrants).
Where are the rest of them? In our communities, schools, and on our streets, creating a massive unfunded liability on the states and gratuitous crime risk. 80 percent of these Unaccompanied children (UACs) are housed with other illegal alien families, and only four percent were sponsored by American families. This is the ultimate social transformation without representation.
While not all Central Americans are violent, far too many of them are and there is no reason there should be any crime risk from those who have no right to be here.
Now that we’ve established that the promise of “Dream” amnesty is the source of the children flooding our communities and schools, we must examine the statutory remedy for dealing with the aftermath. There is a misconception that the William Wilberforce Trafficking Act of 2008 requires that all children from Central America (as opposed to Mexico) caught at the border without parents must be turned over to HHS’s Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) and then resettled into our communities and schools. In fact, most of them should be deported.
A statute that was designed to protect victims of sex trafficking who were truly destitute in this country without parents is now being abused to fund a circuitous smuggling operation whereby illegal immigrant parents smuggle in their own children in order to steal our sovereignty. Ironically, and tragically in the case of the Rockville rapists, it came full circle and resulted in the very sex violence any authentic adherence to statute was designed to prevent.
At its core, THIS is the problem Trump was elected to deal with. He was elected to put American taxpayers first.
The relevant statute (Sec. 235(a) of the Wilberforce Act) authorizes the resettlement program only for those children who are 1) indeed children under 18, 2) have no parent or guardian present in the country, and 3) have been victims of “a severe form” of human trafficking. The overwhelming majority of cases, as is evident with the alleged Rockville rapists, have legal guardians in America who themselves are here illegally and are certainly not victims of trafficking. In fact, their parents are usually the ones paying for the smuggling. According to law, these illegals together with their parents should all be deported, yet Obama violated our sovereignty and bastardized the Wilberforce law as an excuse to flood the country with over 182,000 very impoverished and often problematic illegals from Central America (from FY 2014-Dec. 2016). The Rockville rapists should have been deported along with their relatives last year instead of being dumped into a Montgomery County school.
Anyone who tells you the law required such action is not reading the statute right.
Judge Andrew Hanen of the Southern District of Texas put it best when he charged that DHS “successfully complet(ed) the mission of the criminal conspiracy” by “delivering [minors caught at the border] to the custody of parents illegally living in the United States.” Amazingly, when the Senate debated a failed human trafficking bill last year, they exempted family members from the harsh anti-trafficking penalties, which was a direct nod to illegal immigration.
The result of this government-sponsored invasion is that states and communities are flooded with crushing costs of hundreds of thousands of illegals from the most impoverished and violent parts of the third world. They must spend countless funds on interpreters and bilingual educators and deal with all the social problems the people never voted for. The state of Arizona alone spends $1.4 billion a year on K-12 education for illegal aliens. At its core, THIS is the problem Trump was elected to deal with. He was elected to put American taxpayers first.
Rather than focus on dubious and undefined tax reform, which will never work out for conservatives, why not focus on saving our sovereignty and saving taxpayers more money than we’d get from “tax reform?”
Although President Trump has already properly identified the correct interpretation of the Wilberforce law in one of his immigration memos (Sec. 11(e)), there is no evidence that this represents an enduring policy change with uniform results. Plus, it is always susceptible to the abuse of the judiciary if Secretary Kelly actually begins deporting the non-trafficked UACs. To that end, Trump should call upon Congress to immediately pass H.R. 495, which would take away any ambiguity in law and ensure that every illegal alien minor who is not trafficked is expeditiously reunited with his/her illegal parents and repatriated to their home country.
Furthermore, Congress must explicitly authorize states to use discretion in declining to enroll illegal alien children in public schools unless statute explicitly requires it (a legitimate case of refugee or asylum). At present, the federal courts are stealing the sovereignty of the states and forcing them to enroll all illegal aliens in what is one of their biggest unfunded liabilities. Moreover, the 11th Circuit has prevented Alabama from even attempting to inquire about the citizenship status of enrollees so they can ascertain the extent of the problem.
While this administration’s action against sanctuary cities is a good start, the president should work with the Freedom Caucus to fix problems at the federal level and with the courts so that states that want to defend our sovereignty can do so.
Finally, as we’ve noted before, by building an impenetrable border wall, we will prevent this entire problem in the future. Even a fully successful border patrol that results in a hypothetical 100% apprehension rate only leads to these children being released into our communities. A border wall, on the other hand, prevents them from entering the country to begin with, which saves us from a massive unfunded liability that outweighs the cost of the wall.
Do we have a sovereign and secure country with the American citizenry in charge of their own communities or not? If the answer to that question is no, then we have failed the most vital question behind the social contract of government. Rather than focus on ill-defined tax and porkulous missions together with Democrats, Trump needs to work with conservatives to immediately enact his immigration promises.
Editor’s note: A typographical error in the headline has been fixed.
Daniel Horowitz is a senior editor of Conservative Review. Follow him on Twitter @RMConservative.