Speaker Nancy Pelosi says a lot of strange things. She also says a whole lot of things that are partially true or not true at all. Here is the latest example:
Where to begin. Let’s start here. The Trump administration was very clear about the individuals that ICE was going to pick up during the operation that was supposed to start this week. Following Trump’s tweet last Monday regarding the action by ICE, officials confirmed it would affect those with final deportation orders that have not left the country. According to multiple reports, the total number in this status is around 1 million. The scheduled action was going to affect approximately 2,000.
The agency offered this general response to an inquiry from the Miami Herald:
“The border crisis doesn’t start and stop at the border, which is why ICE will continue to conduct interior enforcement without exemption for those who are in violation of federal immigration law. This includes routine targeted enforcement operations, criminals, individuals subject to removal orders, and worksite enforcement. This is about addressing the border crisis by upholding the rule of law and maintaining the integrity of the immigration system, as created by Congress.”
This seems to be a reasonable explanation for the planned operation that was revealed by the President. Deportation orders are secured at a significant cost in time and resources for the government. They are often issued in absentia when defendants fail to appear for their court dates.
The planned operation was about more than a “status violation”. These individuals are not just in the country illegally. They have been ordered to leave by an appropriate court. I am seriously wondering exactly what kind of court orders should be enforced if these shouldn’t be. Perhaps child support orders? Orders to pay restitution? Restraining orders? With the attitude of Pelosi and some of her colleagues, one has to wonder why we have laws at all.
Even more odd given the information available about the operation, there was significant media political grandstanding about “keeping families together”. Looks like even Vox knew the deportations were a “family op”. One that would reunite and deport family units who had failed to meet the criteria for asylum through due process as specified by law.
As a citizen, I could be arrested for both failure to appear and for failing to follow an order from a judge. I would like to say I can’t understand why Speaker Pelosi thinks illegal immigrants should be given a pass when an American citizen would not. Unfortunately, I can and the answer is to manipulate electoral politics.
Democrats want as many bodies crammed into their districts as possible to cover for people fleeing places like California and New York. According to Fox Business:
As previously reported by FOX Business, while Florida received more movers than any other state last year, New York’s outflows to the Sunshine State were the highest – 63,772 people. New York had the third-largest outflows of any state, with 452,580 people moving out within the past year. California, another high-tax state, had the largest outflow of domestic residents – with the highest proportion of people headed to Texas, Arizona and Washington.
The census is coming up and Congressional apportionment will follow. Following the 2010 census, each Congressional district was set at 710,767. This is without determining the citizen status of the population and prior to the increased outmigration from deep blue states. All you have to do is look at the net outmigration from New York and the concentration of illegal immigrants in the state according to Pew Research in 2017. Then you will also understand the motive of the Democrats.
You will note, the Democrats are fighting three things. The first is any enforcement, especially in large politically blue dots on the map, that will result in the deportation of people they can count. The second is any legislation that stems the flow of people to our southern border that overwhelms our resources and results in “catch and release”. Finally, they are in court fighting the addition of a citizenship question on the census. None of this is happenstance. It is a strategy to prevent the loss of districts when the Congressional map is redrawn after the census. Especially in states like California and New York with high outmigration and large illegal populations.
For a party that screams about voting rights, they certainly seem to be fine eliminating one of the most basic tenets of election integrity. According to U.S. Legal, the one person, one vote rule is a principle of constitutional law under the equal protection clause that requires legislative voting districts to have about the same population. Clearly in some of the urban areas above, this rule is being violated at least in spirit. A significant number of residents are in fact not eligible to vote, thereby giving more weight to those in the district that can.
This is not about compassion, generosity or concern. It is about craven electoral politics and preservation of power. This picture needs to be drawn for the public at every opportunity in the immigration debate to expose the motives that drive the Democrats intractability on the issue. Their positions and objections are deliberately designed to decrease the power of voters in areas of the country that do not have significant populations of illegal immigrants. It should not surprise you to note that in the map above, those areas would generally be colored red.