Minneapolis: Insane

By Mitch Berg

Amid the layoffs, buyouts and restructurings currently going on at the Strib, the rumor had it that Katherine Kersten’s column was saved at least in part because she has never worked as a beat reporter (just as at least one rumor has it that Doug Grow’s departure is tied to the paper’s plan to put him back on the street, due to his experience as a gumshoe general assignment reporter).

And yet her column Friday – about Minneapolis’ reticence to pursue illegal immigrants, even when they are committing crimes – puts to shame many of priorities of the paper’s “news” division (to say nothing of the local partisan agendafloggers dressed in “Ace Reporter” costumes).

Minneapolis, as a matter of city policy, tells its police not to act as surrogate Immigration agents. 

Supporters of the city’s hands-off approach point to a “separation” ordinance, passed in 2003. The ordinance prohibits police from becoming involved in routine immigration enforcement, where immigration is the main issue. Immigrants in the city won’t cooperate with the police if they fear deportation, the reasoning goes.

But that’s not supposed to include interfering with enforcing laws against crime…:

But the ordinance explicitly permits police involvement in investigations like the sex ring. “Nothing in this chapter,” it states, “shall prohibit public safety personnel from assisting federal law enforcement officers in the investigation of criminal activity involving individuals present in the United States who may also be in violation of federal civil immigration laws.”

On Wednesday, Rybak acknowledged that the ordinance doesn’t bar police from engaging in crime fighting just because immigration is involved. “When the issue is clearly prostitution, we will continue to stand strong against it,” he said.

Rybak’s next quote explains a lot about the miasma of dilettantism that besets Minnesota’s largest city:

But wasn’t prostitution the issue in the sex ring bust? “The line between what is prostitution and what is immigration was blurry,” Rybak replied.

I had to stop there for a minute.

“The line between what is prostitution and what is immigration is blurry”.

This is Minneapolis’ mayor

Saint Paul, though hamstrung by a similarly-lefty City Council, hasn’t quite slipped the surly bonds of reason:

The St. Paul Police Department, for its part, wasn’t troubled by “blurry” lines though it too has a “separation” ordinance. In fact, the St. Paul police helped lead the charge against the sex ring operators.

So it’s clear that at least one of the Twin Cities’ loony-left-of-center governments can tell the difference between illegal immigration and prostitution. 

Are Minneapolis citizens well-served when city leaders avoid law enforcement on the “blurry” lines theory — when the crimes at issue may involve illegal immigrants?

Mark Cangemi, now retired from ICE, doesn’t think so. Cangemi was special agent in charge of the sex ring investigation until December 2006. “In the guise of protecting citizens, the Minneapolis leadership is actually harming the most vulnerable,” he says…In Cangemi’s view, Minneapolis’ “separation” ordinance — and its overbroad interpretation — have created a wedge between city police and the feds. In an operation like the sex ring investigation, he says, officers would likely be hampered if they had to make an arrest. “They are afraid they will be chastised and disciplined for doing what they are sworn to do: serve and protect,” he says.

Cops, like Cangemi, talk about enforcing the law.

Mayor Giggles talks about clothes and confusion:

“It’s ICE that has created a wedge,” Rybak retorts. The agency has not removed the word “‘police” from its officers’ jackets, despite his request to do so. Rybak maintains that the word “confuses” people who believe that immigration and criminal enforcement should be separate.

“But we are police!” protests Cangemi. Rybak, he says, “is way beyond his level of expertise” in making such a demand of a federal agency. “Police” is an internationally recognized term, used by law enforcement worldwide. Last year, Cangemi sent Rybak an “open letter” making this point, but Rybak never responded, he says. Rybak’s spokesman says he doesn’t know whether that’s true. Meanwhile, it’s Minneapolis leaders’ priorities that confuse people.

And there, finally, Kersten is wrong.

Nothing confusing about R.T. Rybak’s “priorities”.

Protect his constituencies. 

Simple.

5 Responses to “Minneapolis: Insane”

  1. Colleen Says:

    Words just simply fail.

  2. Chuck Says:

    I used to work with a guy who was a chronic drunk driver. Too bad he was a legal resident, because you know, the line between drunk diving an immigration is a tough one to define.

    Just when you think RT could becoming a bigger idiot. Why to go Mpls, mayby you an elect Lyndon LaRouche next time.

  3. phaedrus Says:

    Based what I read in the Minneapolis Issues Forum, what was blurry was that ICE started asking Hispanic looking people in the area for identification papers, seemingly at random.

    Allegedly, at least 5 were arrested that had nothing to do with the prostitution ring.

    Also allegedly (I don’t know, it was what I read on the list), they were arrested for not having papers to prove they were citizens or here legally.

    Based on the surrounding conversations, it is my understanding that it is a fact that actual American citizens are sometimes arrested and held by ICE without a warrant for no reason other than not having proof that they are a citizen. I do not know if that happened in this case or not.

    But, in any case, if there were people arrested who had nothing to do with the prostitution ring, it creates some blurry lines. If they were arrested because they didn’t have proof of citizenship or right to be here, it definitely creates blurry lines.

    In the immediate aftermath, everyone was trying to sort out what happened. In general, the list seemed to come to a consensus that all in all, what happened was a good thing but there is still some concern about those 5 people.

    I’m not certain, but even if there weren’t 5 non-involved people arrested, the fact that a lot of folks are confused about it could be the “blurry” aspect the mayor mentioned.

    In summary:

    Arrest of sex slavery scum: Good.

    Possible arrest of 5 hispanic looking people because they didn’t have papers: Bad, especially considering that for all we know, they could be American citizens. You shouldn’t be able arrest an American citizen for not having their proof of citizenship on them. If they’re breaking a law and you arrest them and they don’t have ID on them, you can rightfully hold them, but for doing nothing? No way. That’s wrong.

  4. PaulC Says:

    Yeah, we don’t want police just holding anyone they want for the heck of it, agreed.
    But here’s the thing – most of the time, aren’t you prepared to establish your identity? If you go out driving, say – you bring your driver’s license. And there may be a totally unforeseeable reason for a cop to ask you to establish your identity at any point during your journey. Even when just going for a walk or a bike ride I usually make sure I have my wallet on me. It’s just a good idea. People who might be especially vulnerable to misunderstandings of this nature (fairly or not) would behoove themselves to see things like this coming and be able to clear things up quickly. Just a thought.

  5. phaedrus Says:

    When one is driving, one is participating in an activity that requires a certification to legally participate in. It makes sense that if one does not have the right to do something, then when doing it, you need to carry proof that you have the right to be doing it.

    However, merely existing with whatever ancestry, gender, skin tone, religion or, in my opinion, sexual orientation should never, ever require any manner of proof of your right to exist in that state. Not in a country that calls itself free.

    Whether or not I choose to be prepared to establish my identity (and as someone who sometimes decides to pop into a bar or use a check or credit card, I do tend to want to be able to do so) has no relevance on whether or not I should be subject to arrest if I can not establish my identity and am not doing anything that is legally restricted.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

--> Site Meter -->