Posted on 05/13/2007 11:58:29 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
Rudy Giuliani’s record as a pro-choice, pro-gay-marriage New York City mayor is well known, but his willingness to shelter illegal aliens from federal immigration laws in the Big Apple should also give conservatives pause.
Under his control, the New York City Corp. lost a lawsuit against the federal government over Republican-crafted welfare reform legislation that required state and local authorities to report illegal aliens to the Immigration and Naturalization Service.
The law stipulated that only citizens and certain legal immigrants were to receive food stamps and imposed financial penalties on states that did not verify the legal status of those applying for the stamps.
Giuliani said the final welfare reform bill, signed by President Clinton in 1996, was “anti-immigrant” and, “although I do think the bill does some good, in the end I believe it does more harm than good.”
“I believe the anti-immigration movement in America is one of our most serious public problems,” he said in a speech the day before his lawsuit was filed. “The anti-immigration movement can be seen in legislation passed by Congress and the President.”
At the heart of the issue was an executive order by former New York City Mayor Ed Koch (D.) that had been reissued by successive Mayors David Dinkins (D.) and Giuliani. Executive Order 124 forbade city employees from telling federal authorities the immigration status of illegal aliens who sought social services.
On these grounds, Giuliani maintained that the welfare reform law violated the 10th Amendment of the Constitution.
In a speech he delivered Sept. 11, 1996, exactly five years before the massive terrorist attacks, Giuliani explained the dilemma. He said the welfare reform legislation contained “a provision that attempts to reverse an executive order that New York City has had in existence since 1988, which basically says that New York City will create a zone of protection for illegal and undocumented immigrants who are seeking the protection of the police or seeking medical services because they are sick or attempting to put their children in public schools so they can be educated.”
His reasoning was that by allowing illegal aliens to access social services, it would help make New York City cleaner and safer.
“Illegal and undocumented immigrants should be able to seek medical help without the threat of being reported, possibly deported,” Giuliani said in his Oct. 13, 1996, Mayor’s Address.
On July 19, 1997, U.S. District Judge John Koelt, in his ruling against the New York City Corp., said that Giuliani’s policy would “create chaos.” In the opinion, Koelt said that the law did “not require the city to legislate, regulate, enforce or otherwise implement federal immigration policy. . . . Instead, they [Congress] direct only that city officials and agencies be allowed, if they choose, to share information with federal authorities.”
After being defeated by the court, Giuliani sought to uphold his city’s protections for illegal aliens in another way. Heather MacDonald, a scholar at the Manhattan Institute, in a piece for the City Journal in 2004 about illegal aliens and crime wrote, “On Sept. 5, 2001, his handpicked charter-revision committee ruled that New York could still require that its employees keep immigration information confidential to preserve trust between immigrants and government. Six days later, several visa overstayers participated in the most devastating attack on the city and the country in history.”
Giuliani left the mayor’s office in 2001 and was replaced by Michael Bloomberg. Bloomberg supported his predecessors’ commitment to illegal aliens and signed Executive Order 41, which classified immigration status as “confidential information.” E.O. 41 also said that “no city officer or employee shall disclose unless [the suspect] is engaging in illegal activity or is involved in potential terrorist activity.”
After signing E.O. 41, Bloomberg said, “People who are undocumented do not have to worry about city government going to the federal government.”
Because of these pro-illegal-alien executive orders, New York was one of 31 U.S. cities and counties deemed a “sanctuary city” in an August 2006 Congressional Research Service Report. (See page 3.) The report described sanctuary cities as places that have “utilized various mechanisms to ensure that unauthorized aliens who may be present in their jurisdiction illegally are not turned in to federal authorities.”
Radio talk-show host Laura Ingraham last week asked Giuliani about the immigration policies he supported in New York City. She asked, “Are you still standing behind your sanctuary city policy?”
Giuliani told her, “I never supported a sanctuary policy.”
He said he was willing to turn over undocumented criminals to federal immigration authorities, but would not turn over illegal aliens who had not committed a crime.
“I agree with my predecessors, they should be allowed to go to school. And, if they were victims of a crime, if an illegal immigrant was a victim of a crime, I would allow my police to interview them and get the information about the crime and not turn them in under that limited circumstance because if I didn’t do that I’d have a lot of criminals running around hurting people.”
BTTT!
Why are conservatives even considering this man? I know this question has been asked a million times on this site....i’ve seen the answer that he is the only one that gets the WOT...i don’t buy it...after the Ft. Dix Six, any sane person should see that our open borders and truly unknown amount of illegals is a major problem...he’s not the man to look to.
I’ve stayed away from Rudy bashing but good lord!...enough is enough.
Giuliani told her, “I never supported a sanctuary policy.”
Let me just say...LIAR!
Now that’s what I’ve been trying to say.
Rudy is definitely not our man.
Sheesh!
Does he understand which party’s nomination he’s vying for?
LMAO!!!
I would say it "should make conservatives run for the hills".
Very well said. Rudy was great for New York City. But New York City does not reflect the United States, and nor does Giuliani reflect the Republican Party.
Right now, he is a damper on the voice of those who would rise to prominence within the party. It appears as if that damper is being lifted as of late, thankfully.
There’s no sense in attacking Rudy personally, but he’s not the guy.
“Giuliani told her, “I never supported a sanctuary policy.” “
Bare faced lie!
Let me chime in. Rooty, you're a liar!
Nonsense! It was a "bald"-faced lie.
BTTT
Ditto
Why are conservatives even considering this man?
Conservatives aren’t. His supporters are left-leaning Republicans and flat out leftists who see him as a way to destroy the conservative base of the GOP. It’s quick to see as they constantly deride the conservatives against Rudy. Notice that many of the same people are quick to blame conservatives for the ‘06 losses. By denouncing conservatives in one way or another, it is evidence that they don’t consider themselves part of the conservative group. What is ridiculous is their feigned indignance when called on their liberalism.
Many of the folk who are recently departed took on the same opposition to the pro-life cause long before Rudy came front and center. It wasn’t surprising that these same people rabidly supported Rudy and desperately tried to brush aside his pro-abortion personality. It’s because most probably feel the same way. Some of us here know exactly where they stood in the fight against the culture of death because we argued with many of the same who proudly erred on the side of death.
The two points in the first sentence combined with his gun-control stance is enough for me to never consider Rudy as an option. That he worked to conceal illegal immigrants is enough to get me to work against him.
Put a fork in Rudy. Looks like he’s done.
If by some miracle Giuliani makes it through the primaries, I still have no idea what I am going to do. I hope it doesn’t come to that, as I believe a Giuliani presidency would be a disaster for this country.
This %$# is WORSE than Mayor Daley of Chicago (who thinks he runs all of IL). I swear, Rooty is more despicable than Richie Daley and that's saying something.
(I now need to shower after 'sticking up' for Daley)
What a dopey statement. Illegals have broken US immigration laws, therefore, they have committed a crime.
That's the line I was telling you I heard. I'm glad it got posted!
Looks like we’re going to be stuck with either Gulliani or McCain versus Hillary.I’ll vote,but i won’t be thrilled about it:(
: )
“Nonsense! It was a “bald”-faced lie”
Fair enough.
Stick a fork in the drag queen. He/she/it’ done.
Of course he belongs to the MAINSTREAM MEDIA Party. It's powerful and Goebbels is their hero. They are the ones trying to get him ensconced as the Republican candidate.
I get it!!! I get it every time one of these threads about Rudy’s positions gets posted!!! Rudy is not a conservative.
Patriots...only Duncan Hunter and Tom Tancredo are for pragmatic immigration CONTROL. forget these other FLAKES.
“Why are conservatives even considering ths man?” -———”Conservatives aren’t.His supporters are left leaning leftists who see him as a way to destroy the conservative base of the GOP.” Well if you’re right that means there are not that many conservatives who are taking part in those republican polls,that show him demolishing every other republican/conservative,candidate.I consider myself a conservative and I like ALL the candidates in the republican party,that includes Rudy who I have a great deal of respect for,I think the man is a born leader and the republican party is lucky to have him.————Havng said that and after reading many of the posts on this board,I obviously misjudged how much social conservatives hate this man.What I don’t understand is why he’s still the clear front runner in republican polls and why most americans as a whole would rather see him as president than anyone else of either party. I don’t see any other candidate outside of McCain even coming close to his numbers and I can’t even understand why McCain is able to achieve 2nd place in these polls after he sided with the dems in the Senate on a few issues. If Rudy doesn’t win the republican nomination,then another conservative republican better gain momentum and show the numbere’s Rudy is now showing or I believe it’ll be a slam dunk for the liberals in 08,(my worst nightmare) and it’ll remain that way for a long time. The dems are much more united than the republicans and unless we unite as a party it’s all downhill from here.———I think it’s sad———comments?
Wait! This can’t be! Those opposed to Rudy are one-issue voters! /sarc
I don’t see how anyone can not understand that immigration is the number one issue in ‘08. It won’t matter if the radical Muslims blow up a few cities if we are letting the country be destroyed from within by allowing it to be turned into another Latin American cesspool....
Forget Rooty....Hunter / Tancredo... or whoever makes
“no amnesty” immigration reform job one...
Bingo!
I have said this many times:
The only way the Left can win is to destroy the Republican Party from within. They have lost the public argument and cannot win on the issues, they have to have despotic judges do it for them and they have to undermine conservatives in the Republican primary.
bump-a-rooney...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.