Dakota Beacon

A new sheriff in town holds pro-sanctuary government officials and their activist disciples liable for harboring and protecting criminal illegal aliens.

Three categories of anti- Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) proponents include federal agency leakers, pro-illegal alien activists, and state and local pro-sanctuary government officials. They identify as hindering operations that target the illegal alien criminal population.

February 7 was a key date when the Los Angeles Times published a report based on a leaked internal federal memo detailing plans for a “large-scale” ICE “raid” in the Los Angeles area. Criminal aliens, including individuals convicted of serious crimes including rape and murder, were targeted.

Also in early February, Fox News reported that leaks allowed Venezuelan gang members from Tren de Aragua and MS-13 to evade federal agents in Aurora, CO and Boston, MA.

On February 10, Kristi Noem, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary, believed that “corrupt” FBI agents from the previous administration “might” be behind various leaks. Tom Homan, the border czar, concurred. Noem announced that her agency had identified some of the individuals responsible for leaking details about the ICE operations.

Secretary Noem and Attorney General Pam Bondi together vowed to hold the leakers accountable emphasizing that such actions endanger the lives of law enforcement officers and undermine national security. Noem said that DHS is using "every tactic that we have" to track down the leakers, including polygraphs and looking at emails and other communications. "I have found some leakers. We are continuing to get more. They will be fired. There will be consequences." Noem continued. “When they are breaking the law, we are prosecuting and holding them accountable to it. We’re not here to play games.”

What happens to leaked operational information and the leakers? Leakers face huge legal problems if they are charged. So do activists and state and local officials who harbor, protect, or transport illegal aliens suspected or charged with criminal activity.

Leftist groups openly organize ways for criminal illegal aliens to avoid federal law enforcement. Given the dangerous nature of the operations, tipping off criminals can turn into a lethal situation for agents. Worse still are the activists who doxx federal agents. Multiple federal law enforcement sources confirmed that anti-ICE activists interfere with ICE operations by putting up posters announcing the personal information of ICE and Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) officers.

An FBI spokesperson shared a statement warning that those who interfere with law enforcement operations could face potential prosecution. "The FBI safeguards Constitutionally protected rights, including freedom of speech and assembly. However, any individual who impedes law enforcement operations, potentially threatening the safety of law enforcement agents and subjects of their investigations, is subject to investigation and potential prosecution by the Department of Justice." the spokesperson said. This FBI statement was prompted as anti-immigration activists disrupted a planned multi-agency task force operation involving ICE, FBI, and Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) agents.

Eventually the issue boils down to law enforcement authority. What authority do federal agencies have to arrest and prosecute lawbreaking activists who alert or shield illegal aliens? And what about the city and state officials who administer pro-sanctuary policies inhibiting federal agencies from processing illegal aliens?

Here is the short answer. Authority derives from the US Constitution Article VI, Clause 2 known as the “Supremacy Clause.” Under the Supremacy Clause state and local officials are not protected by the doctrine of sovereign immunity from federal criminal prosecution.

Also, the U.S. Justice Department has the authority under 8 U.S Code § 1324 to criminally prosecute any person, including state and local officials, who violate federal immigration law or otherwise attempt to obstruct justice. Such people and officials are not protected by sovereign immunity from federal prosecution. Civil lawsuits can also be filed under the Supremacy Clause when state or local laws directly violate federal immigration statutes or impose “an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives of Congress” in federal immigration laws.

There is no exception from criminal prosecution for people who violate anti-harboring or information-exchange provisions of immigration law. Criminal prosecution over the immigration issue has even been used against a sitting state court judge. The Justice Department is currently seeking a court order declaring sanctuary laws and ordinances invalid and forbidding their enforcement.

Moreover, any attempts by state or local governments to restrict or limit the ability of their own officials or staff to send to, or receive information from, the federal government on the immigration status of any individual is also a civil violation of federal law subject to injunctive issued by a court in any successful litigation brought by the Justice Department.

It appears that, legally, the Trump administration has the upper hand. And Trump is not one to be trifled with.

Dennis M. Patrick can be contacted at (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).