Sanctuary Cities Release 1,000 Illegal’s Every Month – 62% Have Criminal Records


Following the tragic murder of Kathryn Steinle by illegal alien Juan Francisco Lopez Sanchez, who used a federal agent’s gun, sanctuary cities came to the forefront of the national discussion.


Unlike the Biblical refuge cities, these cities harbor and protect people who are known criminals. Now, we’re discovering that these sanctuary cities have released 9,000 criminal illegal aliens from jail in the past nine months alone.

Judicial Watch reported on a new study that covers a nine month period in which approximately 1,000 criminal illegal aliens were released per month from jail in 340 cities nationwide rather than turn them over to federal custody for deportation.

Judicial Watch reports:

According to an updated report prepared by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) for Congress, between January 1 and September 30, 2014, local sanctuaries released 9,295 alien offenders that ICE was seeking to deport. More than 600 people were released at least twice.

Out of these, 5,947 of the criminal aliens (62 percent) had significant prior criminal histories or other public safety concerns even before the arrest that led to a detainer. Fifty-eight percent of those with a prior history of concern had prior felony charges or convictions; 37 percent had serious prior misdemeanor charges, and 5 percent had multiple prior misdemeanors.

An alarming number — 2,320 — of the total number of released offenders were subsequently arrested within the time period studied for new crimes after they were released by the sanctuaries.

Freedom Outpost reports

According to the watchdog group, “legislation to crack down on jurisdictions that obstruct enforcement of federal immigration law is long overdue.”

In July, Obama threatened to veto a bill from the House of Representatives that threatened Sanctuary Cities with punishment by withholding federal law-enforcement grants from cities that shelter illegal immigrants from federal authorities.

Now, there is a bill in the Senate that if passed, would do exactly that.

Senator David Vitter (R-LA) said, “The Obama Administration has forbidden the Department of Homeland Security from removing illegal immigrants unless they have been convicted of serious crimes or have repeatedly flouted the nation’s immigration laws. Thus, when a sanctuary city thwarts DHS, that city is almost certainly releasing someone who poses a serious danger to the community. This should not be a partisan issue. Even the Obama Administration has determined these individuals pose a threat to America. I am pleased to join my colleagues to give the federal government the tools to protect Americans from dangerous, criminal illegal immigrants.”

The legislation is co-sponsored by cosponsors include Sens. Pat Toomey (R-Penn.), Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), John Cornyn (R-Texas), Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska), David Perdue (R-Ga.), Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.), Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), and John Barrasso (R-Wyo.).

According to the statement by Senator Vitter, the legislation would:

  • Defines a sanctuary jurisdiction as a state or locality that prohibits its law enforcement officers from cooperating with federal immigration officials, even if they wish to do so;
  • Provides transparency by requiring DHS to publicly list which jurisdictions are deemed sanctuary jurisdictions;
  • Withholds certain federal funds and grants from sanctuary jurisdictions;
  • Requires that those withheld funds are re-allocated and made available to other state and localities jurisdictions that allow their local law enforcement to cooperate with federal officials;
  • Confirms that local law enforcement have the legal authority to cooperate with federal immigration officials if they wish, while protecting individuals’ civil rights and preserving individuals’ ability to sue for violations of civil and constitutional rights.
  • Kate’s Law: Establishes a mandatory minimum sentence of 5 years for illegal immigrants who are convicted of re-entering the U.S. after being convicted of an aggravated felony or being convicted of having illegally re-entered the U.S. twice prior.

There are approximately 170,000 convicted criminal aliens, who have been ordered to be deported. However, they remain at large in the united States, and over 200 of these sanctuary cities provide a safe haven for them.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement have a difficult time finding these criminals after their release. According to the report, the largest state offender is California.

Vitter made his emphasis clear, “We need to send a loud and clear message to any sanctuary cities that their dangerous policies are not acceptable.”

Below is the study referenced.

Sanctuaries cities-Illegals


  1. Lauren: I contacted my Pasco County Florida Sheriff’s office regarding the Center for Immigration Studies data on the USA map. It shows that my county sheriff decided he “will not honor ICE detainer without probable cause”. I contacted my sheriff’s office regarding my concern about his decision and this is his reply.

    “Sheriff Chris Nocco Responds to Center for Immigration Studies false claim.

    The Center for Immigration Studies has released a false finding claiming Pasco and many other Florida counties including Hillsborough and Pinellas are “Sanctuary Cities”. This false statement is absurd. The Pasco Sheriff’s Office has proven we will enforce the laws of the land and will uphold the Constitution, it is a solemn obligation that we take seriously. It is the indecisiveness and unwillingness of the federal government to make clear decisions on illegal immigration that does not allow a consistent national approach. A true “Sanctuary City” can be seen in San Francisco, and the actions by their Sheriff, which allowed a killer to be on the street.

    The Center for Immigration Studies base their false claim on the following definition:
    More than 200 cities, counties and states across the United States are considered sanctuary cities. These state and local jurisdictions have policies, laws, executive orders, or regulations allowing them to avoid cooperating with federal immigration law enforcement authorities. These “cities” ignore federal law authorizing U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to administratively deport illegal aliens without seeking criminal warrants or convictions from federal, state, or local courts. Although federal law requires the cooperation, the Department of Justice has never sued or taken any measure, including denying federal funds, against a jurisdiction. On the contrary, the present administration has made it difficult for the states and localities which choose to aid in enforcing immigration laws. Federal law was labelled voluntary by the administration in a November 2014 policy memorandum signed by the Homeland Security Secretary.
    Pasco is clearly not a sanctuary city. The Pasco Sheriff’s Office cooperates to the full extent of the law with federal authorities. The Sheriff’s Office policy that all detentions must be based on probable cause is based on constitutional principles annunciated by numerous federal courts. In three separate cases, Galarza v. Szalczyk, 745 F.3d 634 (3d Cir.2014); Morales v. Chadbourne, C.A. No. 12–301–M, 2014 WL 554478 (D.R.I. Feb. 12, 2014); Miranda–Olivares v. Clackamas County., No. 3:12–CV–02317–ST, 2014 WL 1414305 (D.Or. Apr. 11, 2014), federal courts have ruled that suspected illegal immigrants cannot be held unless there is probable cause in keeping with the Fourth Amendment. Galarza, Morales, and Miranda-Olivares each involved instances in which no probable cause existed to believe the detained individuals had committed immigration violations. In each case local authorities were found liable for the detention even though ICE had issued detainers. The Pasco Sheriff’s Office therefore follows the law as established by these cases. This policy is also in line with a legal advisory opinion from the Florida Sheriff’s Association from June 14, 2014.

    The Pasco Sheriff’s Office follows the law. The suggestion by CIS to the contrary is irresponsible and dangerous. Citizens are urged to inform themselves and not believe the slanted positions of advocacy groups that are only focused on furthering their own agenda.”

    Is the Center for Immigration Studies data wrong? It is according to my Sheriff who is accused by CIS of establishing a sanctuary county. Please help me here. Thank you, Linda Trimpey


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here