New York, Chicago, Boston and Denver mayors use platform at Capitol hearing to reject claims about crime and gangs

Before a packed room on Capitol Hill, the House oversight committee, led by its Republican chair, James Comer of Kentucky, sought to portray sanctuary cities – a city that touts municipal laws that protect undocumented migrants – as havens for criminal activity and foreign gangs.

“The point that we’ve got to iron out today is that we have to have cooperation with federal law to turn over those illegal criminals to Ice and we’ve heard reports and many of you have said publicly that you are going to obstruct that,” Comer said. “That is against the law. And we’re going to hear more about that today.”

But instead of cornering the mayors, Republican lawmakers seemed to inadvertently provide them a national megaphone to sell their approaches to local governance and immigration.

“If you wanted to make us safe, pass gun reforms,” Boston mayor Michelle Wu said. “Stop cutting Medicaid. Stop cutting cancer research. Stop cutting funds for veterans. That is what will make our cities safe.”

Archived at https://web.archive.org/web/20250306122406/https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/mar/05/mayors-sanctuary-city-immigration

  • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
    21·
    11 hours ago

    Yeah the ICE generally don’t seem like the type to care about disapproval.

    I tried to find a photo I saw recently with like five of these cucks in a military humvee and mounted gun roaming through downtown, but I’m having trouble finding things with search engines lately.

    • LandedGentry@lemmy.zipEnglish
      16·
      11 hours ago

      A bunch of ice agents fully decked out like that rolled through Mardi Gras in an armored vehicle last week. Like literally in the middle of all the floats and bands and shit.

      • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
        8·
        11 hours ago

        Well yeah there is the way they dress, but it’s moreso because of the fact that they’re a militarized federal entity who reports directly to the president instead of the regular military branches centralized in the pentagon who answer directly to congress. They are literally the President’s private police force, the only thing missing is a private court so he can start issuing uncontested warrants and seizures.

        • Zombiepirate@lemmy.worldEnglish
          2·
          8 hours ago

          The Executive Office For Immigration Review (EOIR) is a sub-agency of the United States Department of Justice whose chief function is to conduct removal proceedings in immigration courts and adjudicate appeals arising from the proceedings. These administrative proceedings determine the removability and admissibility of individuals in the United States. As of January 19, 2023, there were sixty-eight immigration courts and three adjudication centers throughout the United States.

          Immigration adjudication does not conform to the separation of functions as prescribed by the Administrative Procedure Act. Instead, the Department of Homeland Security initiates removal proceeding against a litigant; the immigration judge is employed by EOIR. In the removal proceeding, the U.S. Government is represented by an Assistant Chief Counsel, often referred to as a “DHS attorney” or “trial attorney.” Unlike criminal adjudications in Article III courts, litigants in removal proceedings do not have a constitutional right to counsel, except in narrow circumstances.

          • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
            1·
            1 hour ago

            This is important contextual information and I thank you for adding it, but the EOIR have very strictly limited authority and it’s the the DHS who initiates proceedings and DHS attorneys who prosecute.

            Let me paint you a picture. The other day, Trump asked for 20 Billion climate change funds to be taken back from Citibank tasked with dispersing the funds. The federal prosecutors office declined. It got sent to another prosecutor office. A veteran career prosecutor resigned. An interim attorney filed for seizure, instead. A Judge denied the warrant because no evidence of crime or wrongdoing was presented, necessary for seizure of assets.

            If Trump had his own court, he wouldn’t have had any pushback at any level of this interaction.