“Police departments hiring immigrants as officers,” USA Today reported Sunday. “[S]ome [departments] are allowing immigrants who are legally in the country to wear the badge. From Hawaii to Vermont, agencies are allowing green-card holders and legal immigrants with work permits to join their ranks.”
To paraphrase Bill Clinton, that depends on what the meaning of the term “legal” is.
“Some, like the Chicago and Hawaii police departments, allow any immigrant with a work authorization from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services to become an officer,” the story explains. “That means people in the country on temporary visas or are applying for green cards can join.”
While some apologist for the policy, like Ali Noorani, executive director of the National Immigration Forum, which advocates for “a pathway to citizenship for those who are here illegally,” dismiss security concerns as a “straw man” argument, Mark Krikorian, director of the Center for Immigration Studies, warns that standards for ensuring that are far from assured. And while he is unconcerned “with green-card holders … because they’ve made a long-term commitment to the country and have undergone extensive background checks … he worries about the security risks associated with allowing any immigrant with a work permit to become an officer, especially considering that the Obama administration has given hundreds of thousands of undocumented immigrants work permits.”
It’s more than that, which Krikorian’s own organization has documented. A lot more, if a CIS study published in February is accurate.
“More than 2.2 million work permits were issued over this time period [2009 to 2014] to illegal aliens or aliens unqualified for admission,” director of policy studies Jessica Vaughn elaborated. “Nearly all of these (2.1 million) were illegal aliens who crossed the border illegally (Entered Without Inspection). Inexplicably, 2,860 work permits were issued to aliens who were denied asylum, were suspected of using fraudulent documents, were stowaways, or were refused at a port of entry.”
The need for transparent oversight and accountability under such circumstances must include assurances that all officers deployed are versed and committed to the Bill of Rights, required in the oath to the Constitution mandated by Article. VI. That further includes an understanding of a duty to reject unlawful orders, the core purpose behind Oath Keepers, and a legitimate concern Americans should have regarding all officers.
With increased militarization of police, and with “[m]any cities … reducing the minimum standards to attract candidates,” a primary concern leaders sworn “to secure the Blessings of Liberty” ought to guard against is the presence of de facto foreign troops enforcing gun bans and disarming Americans on U.S. soil.
It’s fair to ask if this is what the Framers really had in mind when they recognized what was “necessary to the security of a free State.”