Hillary Clinton and the release of thousands of criminal aliens

Here’s an underreported scandal brought to my attention by Bill Otis. CBS News reports:

The U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) released 36,007 convicted criminal aliens last year who were awaiting the outcome of deportation proceedings, according to a report issued Monday by the Center for Immigration Studies.

The group of released criminals includes those convicted of homicide, sexual assault, kidnapping and aggravated assault, according to the report, which cites a document prepared by the ICE. . . .

According to the report, the 36,007 individuals released represented nearly 88,000 convictions, including:

•193 homicide convictions
•426 sexual assault convictions
•303 kidnapping convictions
•1,075 aggravated assault convictions
•1,160 stolen vehicle convictions
•9,187 dangerous drug convictions
•16,070 drunk or drugged driving convictions

In effect, the administration has, as Bill Otis puts it, “unleashed its own crime wave.” But who within the administration was responsible for this for wanton indifference to public safety?

One responsible party is Hillary Clinton. Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies explains why:

The Supreme Court [has] held that the federal government can detain aliens for deportation up to six months but generally must release the alien into the United States after that point if there is “no significant likelihood of removal in the reasonably foreseeable future.” One of the main reasons such a situation arises is that a criminal alien’s home country will refuse to take its nationals back.

Why would a criminal alien’s home country take the criminal back? Because federal law requires the secretary of state to stop issuing visas to the citizens of any country that refuses to take back its nationals.

Refusing to issue visas to citizens of a foreign country would provide a powerful incentive for that country to take back its nationals and thus create a significant likelihood of removal in the foreseeable future. This, in turn, would enable the U.S. to avoid releasing criminal aliens onto our streets.

But according to Krikorian, Hillary Clinton and John Kerry have ignored the law and continued issuing visas to citizens of countries that refuse to take back their citizens. Apparently, they don’t wish to risk alienating these countries. They would rather see dangerous criminals on the loose in the United States.

It’s a strange and irresponsible preference. More than that, it’s an illegal one. 8 U.S.C. Section 1253(d) commands that:

On being notified by the [DHS Secretary] that the government of a foreign country denies or unreasonably delays accepting an alien who is a citizen, subject, national, or resident of that country after the [DHS Secretary] asks whether the government will accept the alien under this section, the Secretary of State shall order consular officers in that foreign country to discontinue granting immigrant visas or nonimmigrant visas, or both, to citizens, subjects, nationals, and residents of that country until the [DHS Secretary] notifies the Secretary that the country has accepted the alien.

(emphasis added)

In sum, the lawless behavior of the State Department, beginning under Hillary Clinton, has created a threat to public safety in America. That will be worth remembering when criminal aliens released because of the State Department’s unwillingness to follow the law commit grisly crimes in the future.

Hillary Clinton might be a shoe-in for the presidency if only she had done no harm as Secretary of State. Having failed in multiple ways to meet this low standard, she is not a shoe-in.

Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.

Responses