"Criminal aliens are not deserving of additional protections not available to citizens and legal immigrants."

Tom Tancredo writes,

The identity politics behind “sanctuary cities” failed Hillary Clinton miserably, and it may yet prove to be the Achilles heel of big city Democrat mayors as well.

There’s a new sheriff in town, and he has both the law and public opinion on his side. Sanctuary city advocates in Los Angeles, Denver, Atlanta, New York and other cities are about to be confronted by a Congress and federal law enforcement agencies united in a simple mission: to enforce the law.

...The Trump administration and Congress understand that sanctuary city policies have nothing to do with protecting children and families. Obstructing the legitimate enforcement of federal immigration law is about protecting convicted criminals from the consequences of their criminal behavior. Urban politicians will soon learn there are consequences for their criminally negligent behavior as well.

As to the arguments heard every day in defense of sanctuary city policies, they are hollow and unpersuasive to most Americans.

Can “immigrant family unity” be disrupted by the conviction and eventual deportation of a criminal alien? Yes. But please ask your local Social Justice Warrior this question: why is that more unfortunate and unacceptable than the consequences suffered by the family of a citizen or legal immigrant who is convicted of auto theft, assault, murder, or selling heroin or methamphetamines?
When did “family unity” become an escape hatch only for illegal aliens but not for anyone else? Is it because any proposal to adopt it as a legal principle applicable to all criminal defendants would be laughed out of town?

The inconvenient truth is that ending sanctuary city policies is a step toward equal justice for all, citizen and illegal immigrant alike. Criminal aliens are not deserving of additional protections not available to citizens and legal immigrants.

Read more here.