A little discussed report by the United States Sentencing Commission has been released with an astonishing figure: Of the more than 2,200 people who received federal sentences for drug possession in fiscal year 2014, almost three-quarters of them were illegal immigrants. In addition, illegal immigrants reportedly made up more than one-third of all federal sentences for all crimes.
Unfortunately, the comments of Donald Trump have sucked the oxygen out of the public debate on the significance of such crime trends. According to new data from the United States Sentencing Commission. While crimes by illegal immigrants are slightly down (38.6 percent of all federal sentencings in 2013 but 36.7 percent in 2014), they still represent a huge percentage of such offenses in the federal system given that they represent an estimated 3.5 percent of the U.S population. There is available data from the states, though individual states likely have figures.
This includes 20 percent of the kidnapping/hostage taking sentences in 2014 and 12 percent of the murder sentences. Another 19.4 percent of national-defense related sentences are attributed to illegal immigrants.
If you combine both illegal and legal aliens, the population represents almost half of all sentences — 42 percent of all federal sentencing in 2014.
These figures are according to the Washington Examiner and have been reported on other sites. I went and looked at the Sentencing Commission report and confirmed the figure on non-citizens but I could not locate the specific numbers on illegal immigrants. If anyone has a link, it would be great to add it. Here are the general sourcebook tables from the United States Sentencing Commission.
I know exactly what Trump means when he says the Mexicans will pay for the wall. Because he will use their own money to build it! It’s the same as if Obama/Holder said, “Let’s pay the Banksters more, and let’s get their customers to pay for it!”
All you have to do is sit back while the fees go up, or turn a blind eye to shady practices, and voila! The Bankers get richer off their customers! Same with Mexico. Slap a tariff on their imports to the U.S., or send back their citizens and let them handle the problems, and voila We pay for the wall out of the fees, or out of the savings!
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
OR, Karen, perhaps we should call for a tax increase to get that wall built. It sure won’t build itself, now will it?
Karen,
Trump is the one calling for the wall and making ridiculous assertions that he could get the Mexican government to build it. If you think his over the top rhetoric is serious policy, feel free to vote for him, put your vote where your principles are. Trump is running for Trump, not for the American people.
I believe that the majority of illegals come here to work, not commit crimes, but there is no way around the fact that people who are willing to break one law to get what they want, are likely to break others when it suits their interests. But given that the federal government isn’t particularly concerned about illegal immigration, it seems only fair that we all get to pick and choose among the laws that we wish to obey. Certainly, overall respect for the law has declined over the past few decades, and I believe that the government is in large part responsible for that. Allowing large scale law breaking does not go unnoticed, and creates cynicism towards the law and the government.
Tim – when they are bringing marijuana over the border in bales, the US Attorney’s office is not over-charging.
Annie:
The patriotic thing for you to do would be to pay more taxes than you owe, like maybe double. If you have a roof over your head and a middle class lifestyle, then clearly you are not paying your fair share.
You didn’t build that middle class lifestyle. You benefitted from public schools and roads. You owe more. It is unpatriotic for you to ask our CPA to get you every deduction to which you’re entitled.
So pay up. It’s the patriotic thing to do.
As I said before, I wouldn’t vote for Trump, but we obviously have a porous border. The most rabidly anti-semitic, Holocaust denier, 9/11 denier person I’ve ever known was a Middle Eastern man who immigrated here illegally across the Mexican border, and then was caught years later.
If we do not shore up our border, we are all going to pay. We currently pay the price in higher crime, as Professor Turley indicated. But we could absolutely pay more. For all we know, terrorists cross the border while dancing the samba, and we’d have no idea.
It is inconceivable to me that people feel we should not talk about the crime of illegal immigration, and all the subsequent crimes that go hand in hand, such as identity theft, because we “might lose the Hispanic vote.”
This is EXACTLY what’s wrong with politics. It’s not about right or wrong or your constituents; it’s about strategy. This is also why Democrats fight tooth and nail against purging voter roles of illegal aliens and other fraudulent entries.
Karen, The problem with the purges is that they in almost ALL cases purged LEGAL voters. I suggest you read Palast’s articles on how FL did this in 2000. They even purged a registrar of voters in one county! THAT is the problem not voter fraud which is miniscule. The Congressman from the 22nd district in Texas voted TWICE in 2000. Once in VA where he lived, then in CT where his parents lived and he used an absentee ballot. Nothing was done about him.
I think if Trump loses the nomination he should pay for that wall himself. Good idea Karen! Put his money where his mouth is, as he said he is very very wealthy, it would be the patriotic thing to do.
bam bam:
I wonder if Mexico’s strict immigration laws, where you get jailed for illegal immigration, “anti-American?”
randyjet:
Don’t forget to include crimes like identity theft, hit and run (because they’re uninsured), fraudulent receipt of benefits, working under the table for cash and not paying taxes or paying your own workers minimum wage, etc. The list is quite long for crimes that do not include murder.
This is an example of the danger of crime statistics without context. Of the 31,432 offenses attributed to non-US citizens (which doesn’t necessarily mean “illegal”) 20,823 were in the “Immigration” offense category. This makes sense, right? Who gets charged the most for immigration violations? Illegal immigrants. Remove those 20,823 violations, and the percentage of offenses attributed to non-US citizens plummets from 42% to 20%.
Similarly, it makes sense that a large percentage of FEDERAL drug trafficking offenses are attributed to non-US citizens bring drugs in from out of the country…they’re caught by the DEA, FBI, etc. Ditto simple possession (you’re generally possessing drugs when you’re caught trafficking them).
Lastly, remember — it is the US Attorneys offices that determine what to charge someone with. Prosecutors are notorious for overcharging. “National Defense” doesn’t necessarily mean the non-US citizen charged was attempting to sabotage a military installation…some overcharging AUSA could’ve added this as an additional charge b/c someone entered illegally.
Lastly, as for kidnapping, were these smugglers hired to bring people in, only to then hold them hostage until they received additional payment? Or are they non-US citizens in custody disputes taking their kids overseas? Or, are they non-US citizens grabbing people off the street? Unlikely.
Plus, since 7 out of 10 border crossings are successful, and Border Patrol is prohibited from apprehending groups of 20 or more, it’s just catch and release, anyway. People ridiculed Trump for saying he would build a wall that would rival China, and that criminal illegal aliens are a problem. But they ignore the actual facts: If 7/10 crossings are successful, then clearly our border is not secure. And Professor Turley just discussed the very real crisis of criminal illegal aliens.
https://www.numbersusa.com/news/border-patrol-agent-testifies-senate-committee-indicated-6-10-aliens-cross-border
Here’s this testimony before the Senate Homeland Security. The figures he gives is 6/10 success rate:
““Ask any line Agent in the field and he or she will tell you that at best we apprehend 35-40% of the illegal immigrants attempting to cross,” Cabrera said, reading from a written testimony. “This number is even lower for drug smugglers who are much more adept at eluding capture.”
Cabrera went on to testify that that his fellow agents “face retribution” from their superiors for reporting illegal alien groups larger than 20.
“Agents who repeatedly report groups larger than 20 face retribution. Management will either take them out of the field and assign them to processing detainees at the station or assign them to a fixed position in low volume areas as punishment,” Cabrera told lawmakers. “Needless to say Agents got the message and now stay below this 20 person threshold no matter the actual size of the group.””
I would not vote for Trump, but I would love if he would build us a wall that would discourage these crossings. The other alternative is heavy use of drones, but Border Patrol has to actually apprehend everyone they catch by drone. That’s clearly not happening, because the administration is actively playing with the numbers to make itself look better, like most politicians do.
randyjet:
“Once they finish their sentence, presumably they will be deported no matter their immigration status.”
Oh, randyjet, you would be oh so wrong. That would be applying common sense to politics, and “never the twain shall meet.”
A good example is San Francisco, a sanctuary city that prohibits this practice. That is how a 5 times deported illegal alien got out of jail, stole a gun, and shot a young lady walking on the boardwalk next to her father.
It is true that it is federal policy to deport illegal aliens who are convicted of serious crimes, but sanctuary cities (so common in CA) circumvent this law, and attract criminal aliens for this very reason. In addition, the other deportation figures have been proven inflated because it includes turnarounds at the border, as well as double counts figures from Border Patrol and ICE.
http://cis.org/revolving-door-deportations-of-criminal-illegal-immigrants
Yes indeed Turley’s Friday Tabloid. And, another full net.
Cherry pick statistics for something that will grab the eye.
And here is something else to add – sanctuary cities prohibit turning over criminal illegal aliens to ICE. We don’t even deport them when they’re criminals!
It’s like Professor Turley just visited California! 🙂 The land of Mexican drug cartels.
Liberals keep declaring that it’s racist or rude to even discuss such a serious problem. I’ve listed many times the problems with both violent and non-violent illegal immigrants.
We need to emulate other countries in this respect: crack down on illegal immigration and streamline the legal immigration process. Make doing the wrong thing hard and the right thing easier. We also need to obviously set our total immigration limits annually to unemployment. When unemployment soars, we should not increase the importation of millions of entry level workers. When unemployment plummets, those immigration figures can go higher. This just seems like common sense.
Why is the call to ban illegal immigrants, from Mexico or anywhere else, classified as being anti-Hispanic? Why is it not considered a call to enforce and secure our borders, which is the right of a sovereign nation? Why is it not considered a call to limit our exposure to dangerous and violent criminals, who are infiltrating our communities and causing havoc and destruction?
But aren’t 100% of illegal aliens already criminals by the mere fact they are here ILLEGALLY? Not all crimes are violent. Bribery, tax evasion, kiddie pornography, selling booze to minors, fishing without a license, selling counterfeit goods, driving without insurance, fraud, etc.
I wonder if these people are less likely to be able to afford competent representation is a factor. This is sentencing, not arrests.
Hispanics are in large part conservative. They are family oriented. They are religious. They are hard working and entrepreneurial. W got 40% of the Hispanic vote. A SMART Republican, who can show they are able to differentiate between the criminal element and the much more law abiding segment of the Hispanic culture, could easily push past the 50% threshold.
Nick
I heard someone is putting on a new version of Hamlet. The play they put on to catch the conscience of the king is Westside Story.
Keeping with the original plot the king doesn’t have a conscience and has no problem screwing those closest to him.
As to law abiding Hispanics: if they cross illegally they are by definition law breakers and should not be able to vote.