More Pathetic Excuses
by James A. Bacon
Democrats in the General Assembly are killing Republican bills right and left. In one incident that drew my jaundiced attention this morning, the Senate Courts of Justice Committee voted yesterday to spike a Republican-sponsored bill that would make it easier to deport convicted violent felons. I almost feel guilty writing about this. Mocking the people speaking against the proposal is easier than losing socks in the laundry.
State law requires law enforcement authorities to check the immigration status of adults convicted of violent crimes. But the law does not require the same for juveniles, creating a loophole for youthful lawbreakers who enter correctional facilities as juveniles but are not released until after they have aged into adulthood. Senator Tara Durant, R-Fredericksburg, submitted SB 1268 to require authorities to check the immigration status of juveniles as well, and to forward that information to U.S. Immigration Customs and Enforcement (ICE).
Sophia Gregg with the American Civil Liberties Union of Virginia countered that juveniles should not be questioned about their immigration status without a guardian present. “There is no reason that we should treat children the same way we treat adults,” The Virginia Mercury reports her as saying.
Sheila Herlihy of the Virginia Interfaith Center said the interrogation of immigrants conflicted, in the Mercury’s words, with the values of welcoming communities.
Senator Jennifer Carroll Foy, D-Prince William, called the legislation “unnecessary, duplicative, and a messaging bill,” and said that it unfairly vilified immigrant communities. “At the end of the day, the studies and statistics show that immigrants who do commit crimes commit them at a lower rate than the people who are actually here lawfully.”
I am not making this up.
(Bacon rubs his hands gleefully.) OK, let’s get to work.
Must have a guardian present. Correctional officials can lawfully ask juveniles for their name, birth date, medical conditions, medications, mental-health history, names of family members, behavioral history, school-enrollment status and employment history. But the ACLU’s Gregg draws the line at asking if they are residing in the county legally… unless a parent or guardian is present.
Why the particular need to have a parent or guardian present? To offer guidance on whether to answer the question or not. There is only one reason to not answer the question, and that is to avoid being deported. Unless there is some fundamental human right to not be subjected to questions you’d rather not answer, Gregg has no argument here. She just wants to help violent adolescents dodge ICE after they are released from jail or prison.
Welcoming communities. But that’s nothing compared to Herlihy with the Virginia Interfaith Center, who says that interrogating prisoners is antithetical to a welcoming community.
First of all, asking someone his immigration status is not the same as “interrogating” him. That’s just a word used to make the question sound like dark and ominous.
Second, when Herlihy says that querying violent youth conflicts with the ideals of a “welcoming community,” there is only one way to parse her thought: “Welcoming communities” would not hold young people accountable for their violent deeds. You’re under 18? Congratulations, you get a special dispensation!
Such magnanimity is fine for spokespersons who don’t actually live in the communities they purport to speak for. But law-abiding people who suffer violence at the hands of youthful predators might have different ideas. According to a June 2024 CBS News/YouGov poll, 53% of Hispanics support the deportation of undocumented immigrants. How many Hispanics do you suppose support the expulsion of undocumented immigrants convicted of violent crimes and most of whose victims were Hispanic like yourself?
Unfair vilification. I’m saving the best for last: Carol Foy.
First, an inanity: Durant’s bill, Foy says, unfairly vilifies immigrant communities.
No, ascertaining someone’s immigrant status simply establishes a fact. It doesn’t vilify anyone. Moreover, the proposed law would be directed at individuals, not the communities in which they live. As noted above, most people in those immigrant communities don’t want violent felons in their midst.
But that’s nothing compared to this non sequitur: Studies and statistics show that undocumented immigrants commit crimes at lower rates than the population at large. What? The law would pertain to convicted felons only! One hundred percent of the individuals queried would have committed a violent crime, so, by definition they commit crimes at a higher rate than the general populace!!
These excuses are so pathetically inadequate that Gregg, Herlihy and Foy should have been laughed out of the committee chamber. But they weren’t. What does that tell you?
The Committee voted to pass the bill by indefinitely, in effect burying it for the session. Here was the party-line vote:
