[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 156 (2010), Part 10]
[House]
[Page 13464]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          FEDS SUING ARIZONA FOR DOING A JOB THE FEDS WON'T DO

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Poe) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, the Justice Department is suing 
Arizona for enforcing Federal laws that are already on the books. Other 
States and counties already have enforcement laws like Arizona's.
  Prince William County in Virginia has laws almost identical to the 
new Arizona Senate Bill 1070 enforcement law. Police are allowed to 
check legal status at any time. Police are also required to check 
immigration status if anyone is arrested for anything, including DUI or 
public drunkenness.
  According to Corey Stewart, the county board chairman, there has been 
a 37 percent drop in violent crime in the first 2 years of enforcement 
of this law. Overall, crime in Prince William County, Virginia, is at a 
15-year low. Criminal aliens have fled that part of Virginia and gone 
somewhere else where the laws are not enforced. Stewart says there has 
not been one substantiated claim of racial profiling.
  Also, the State of Rhode Island enforces Federal immigration law by 
executive order, like the sanctuary cities, only in reverse. The 
Governor said his law enforcement officers must enforce this Federal 
law.
  There are more States that follow suit. In Missouri, if police want 
to see your ID papers to prove legal status, they are free to ask. 
Sanctuary cities are illegal in Missouri and they enforce the E-Verify 
system for employers. That's the free system set up by the Federal 
Government where all employers can check someone's immigration status. 
In Missouri, you have to be legal to get a driver's license and there 
is no in-State tuition for illegals at State junior colleges.
  So why the double standard at the Justice Department and suing 
Arizona? Why are the Feds picking on Arizona and not these other 
States?
  On the other hand, there are two laws that expressly forbid States 
from having sanctuary cities. The laws are found in title 8, section 
1373 and title 8, section 1644 of the United States code.
  These statutes say cities may not have policy that prohibits peace 
officers from communicating with the Federal Government about a 
person's immigration status. But there are cities across the country 
with policies banning their police from calling the Federal Government 
to report even criminal illegals.
  In San Francisco, one recent case turned tragic. In 2008, there were 
three members of a family that were gunned down by Salvadoran illegals. 
Edwin Ramos is a member of the MS-13 narcoterrorist gang, and he is on 
trial for gunning down one of the members of this family. Two young 
sons of that family were also gunned down, Matthew and Michael were 
their names.
  They were all in a car driving home from a family barbecue after 
church. They were not gang members, they were just citizens. They were 
in the wrong place at the wrong time, and Ramos, their accused killer, 
had been previously arrested three times.
  San Francisco police knew he was an illegal alien MS-13 gang member. 
The San Francisco Chronicle reported after the shooting that the city's 
sanctuary policy was the reason authorities never called the Federal 
Government. I repeat. The newspaper, the San Francisco Chronicle, 
reported after the shooting that the city's sanctuary policy was the 
reason the authorities did not call the Feds.
  Instead of being detained and deported, gang member Edwin Ramos was 
released, and he killed a father and the two young brothers because of 
the Federal Government's tolerance to sanctuary cities. So the blood is 
on the hands of those who support the concept of sanctuary cities. 
There was even an eyewitness to the shooting, and Tony's youngest son, 
who survived the hail of bullets, was that witness.
  Is the Justice Department suing San Francisco to stop this sort of 
irresponsible action? No, of course not.
  Instead, the Justice Department is using taxpayer dollars to sue the 
State of Arizona for enforcing Federal laws. Arizona is not creating 
any new laws, they are merely enforcing the Federal law under 
concurrent jurisdiction.
  The sanctuary cities pose a greater danger to American cities because 
they give a sanctuary to all illegals. They shield criminal aliens from 
being detained and deported by the Federal Government, and sanctuary 
cities, in my opinion, operate in violation of the Federal Government 
law prohibiting such. But because of politics, the administration is 
suing Arizona for upholding the law and refuses to sue sanctuary cities 
for violating Federal law.
  We hear the rhetoric that illegals do jobs Americans won't do. Now we 
have an actual situation where Arizona is getting sued for doing a job 
the American government won't do--protecting the security of the 
country and enforcing the law.
  And that's just the way it is.

                          ____________________