“These outrageous sanctuary cities are grave threats to public safety and national security,” Trump said in a speech to the Safe Neighborhoods Conference in Kansas City, Mo., on Dec. 7, less than a month after the White House asked ICE about moving detainees to such cities. “Each year, sanctuary cities release thousands of known criminal aliens from their custody and right back into the community. So they put them in, and they have them, and they let them go, and it drives you people a little bit crazy, doesn’t it, huh?”<doc-sep>Here’s a Trump White House immigration gambit that likely will shock, but not surprise you. The Trump administration, the Washington Post reported Thursday, came up with a cartoonishly villainous plan and then pressured immigration officials to carry out the Trumpian scheme of arresting undocumented migrants coming into the country and then busing them and releasing them on the streets of so-called sanctuary cities. The aim? Retaliation, of course, against political enemies and for not treating undocumented families like criminals. Advertisement The Trump folks tried to make this plan a reality on multiple occasions over the last six months, according to Department of Homeland Security officials and email messages reviewed by The Post. White House officials first broached the plan in a Nov. 16 email, asking officials at several agencies whether members of the caravan could be arrested at the border and then bused “to small- and mid-sized sanctuary cities,” places where local authorities have refused to hand over illegal immigrants for deportation… The attempt at political retribution raised alarm within ICE, with a top official responding that it was rife with budgetary and liability concerns, and noting that “there are PR risks as well.” Senior Trump adviser Stephen Miller discussed the proposal with ICE, according to two DHS officials. Matthew Albence, who is ICE’s acting deputy director, immediately questioned the proposal in November and later circulated the idea within his agency when it resurfaced in February, seeking the legal review that ultimately doomed the proposal. “This was just a suggestion that was floated and rejected, which ended any further discussion,” the White House statement said. It was just a brainstorm!<doc-sep>A scuttled White House proposal to release immigrant detainees in San Francisco and other sanctuary cities triggered a fierce backlash Friday from Democrats including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, whose office called the idea “despicable.” The Washington Post first reported that the White House proposed sending the detainees to sanctuary cities, including Pelosi's district, twice in the last six months. The proposal was first floated in November amid reports of a large migrant caravan from Central America making its way to the southern border. The idea was again considered in February, amid the standoff with Congress over a border wall. WHITE HOUSE PROPOSED RELEASING IMMIGRANT DETAINEES INTO 'SANCTUARY CITIES' TO TARGET POLITICAL FOES: REPORT “The extent of this Administration’s cynicism and cruelty cannot be overstated,” Pelosi spokeswoman Ashley Etienne said in a statement Friday. “Using human beings—including little children—as pawns in their warped game to perpetuate fear and demonize immigrants is despicable, and in some cases, criminal.” She added: “The American people have resoundingly rejected this Administration’s toxic anti-immigrant policies, and Democrats will continue to advance immigration policies that keep us safe and honor our values.” Officials stressed that the plan never went anywhere. A source familiar with the discussions also told Fox News that Democrats who advocate leniency toward illegal immigrants should work with the administration to find ways to transport those set for release, including in their states and districts. The proposal was apparently rejected both times it came up by immigration agencies. A Nov. 16 email from the White House to officials at several agencies reportedly asked whether migrants could be arrested and bused to “small-and mid-sized sanctuary cities” and other Democratic strongholds. Pelosi’s district in San Francisco was considered one of the areas targeted, according to The Post. TRUMP SAYS NO PLAN TO REVIVE FAMILY SEPARATIONS, BLAMES OBAMA FOR UPROAR The proposal was intended to alleviate crowded detention centers, the White House told Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The same report said "the attempt at political retribution raised alarm within ICE." An ICE official responded, noting that there were budgetary and liability issues, but also said “there are PR risks as well.” The source familiar with the discussions argued, however, that the White House did not view this as political retribution. “This was just a suggestion that was floated and rejected, which ended any further discussion,” the White House told The Post. In a statement, Deputy ICE Director Matt Albence also pushed back and said he was not pressured by the White House – though indicated such a proposal was put forward. “As the Acting Deputy I was not pressured by anyone at the White House on this issue. I was asked my opinion and provided it and my advice was heeded. The email exchange is clear and suggesting that it indicates inappropriate pressure is inaccurate,” he said. President Trump has repeatedly blasted sanctuary cities, which are areas where local authorities refuse to cooperate with federal immigration agencies. The cities are typically run by Democrats. The president was also hit this week with questions over the administration’s past family separation policy at the border. Trump said they have no plans to revive the policy, amid renewed speculation about whether the practice could return amid a shake-up in staffing at the Department of Homeland Security including the resignation of Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen. Kevin McAleenan, who was serving as CBP commissioner, is replacing her as acting secretary. Nielsen’s resignation comes amid an influx of migrants at the U.S.-Mexico border. Nielsen was reportedly frustrated with the difficulty of getting other departments to help deal with the growing number of families crossing the border. But administration officials told Fox News that McAleenan best fits Trump’s requirement of being the “toughest cop” on the frontier, and that Nielsen had been viewed as resistant to some of the immigration measures pushed by the president and his aides. By Tuesday, DHS Acting Deputy Secretary Claire Grady also resigned. And on Wednesday, Nielsen announced that ICE Acting Director Ron Vitiello would be stepping down by the end of the week. Fox News’ Kristin Brown, Matt Leach and The Associated Press contributed to this report.<doc-sep>President Donald Trump speaks to reporters upon departure from the White House in Washington, April 10, 2019. "Due to the fact that Democrats are unwilling to change our very dangerous immigration laws, we are indeed, as reported, giving strong considerations to placing Illegal Immigrants in Sanctuary Cities only," the president wrote in a post on Twitter. The announcement, which came via Twitter, and which the president later doubled-down on, followed an initial report late Thursday about the plan by The Washington Post. President Donald Trump on Friday insisted that his administration is still actively considering a plan to release detained immigrants into so-called "sanctuary cities," a strategy which was rejected twice in the past year by the Department of Homeland Security. "....The Radical Left always seems to have an Open Borders, Open Arms policy – so this should make them very happy!" the president wrote in a second tweet. Trump's announcement is a near-total reversal by the president of the official position his White House has taken so far. In a statement Thursday to reporters, a Homeland Security Department spokesman said the plan "was a suggestion that was floated and rejected, which ended any further discussion." Trump tweet A former DHS official, discussing the White House's thinking, told NBC News that the plan was dropped when it was deemed "so illegal." In a statement following the president's tweet, a White House spokesperson chided Democrats for opposing the plan and said they "should be working with the Administration." "Democrats say we must have open borders and that illegal immigrants have a right to be in this country at all costs, so they should be working with the Administration to find the best ways to transport those illegal aliens that are already set for release, into communities in their states and districts," the spokesman, Hogan Gidley, said. Later Friday, during an event related to 5G deployment, the president said that "we will bring them to sanctuary city areas and let that particular area take care of it, whether it's a state, or whatever that might be." "We can give them an unlimited supply, and let's see if they're so happy," Trump said. According to The Washington Post, the plan was geared toward delivering political retribution to Democrats including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, whose San Francisco district was discussed as a target. Pelosi on Friday told reporters that the plan was "just another notion that is unworthy of the presidency of the United States and disrespectful, the challenges we face as a country, as a people to address who we are — a nation of immigrants."<doc-sep>
Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials reportedly rejected requests by President Donald Trump's White House to release apprehended migrants into America's "sanctuary cities" as revenge against Democrats for opposing for Trump's immigration policies, including funding for a border wall. According to The Washington Post, citing Department of Homeland Security officials and emails that it reviewed, the White House twice suggested this to the DHS, first in November 2018 and again in February, but ICE rejected the plan, telling the White House there would be budgetary and liability concerns, and "PR risks as well." According to The Post, the White House sought to release the detainees into "Democratic strongholds," including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's district in California, saying it would both relieve pressure on ICE detention centers, as well as make a political point. ICE and the White House did not respond immediately to Newsweek's requests for comment. A DHS spokesperson told Reuters the plan was "a suggestion that was floated and rejected, which ended any further discussion." A White House official, in a statement to The New York Times, called the proposal a "nonstory," and said: "The administration's position is that we want to deport—not release—illegal aliens." "The extent of this administration's cynicism and cruelty cannot be overstated," Ashley Etienne, Pelosi's communications director, said in a statement to The Post. "Using human beings—including little children—as pawns in their warped game to perpetuate fear and demonize immigrants is despicable, and in some cases, criminal," the statement contnued. "The American people have resoundingly rejected this administration's toxic anti-immigrant policies, and Democrats will continue to advance immigration policies that keep us safe and honor our values." So-called sanctuary cities are local jurisdictions that limit their cooperation with federal authorities, such as ICE, in enforcing immiagration laws. They are one of Trump's favorite attack targets, and his administration has worked to block federal funding for them. Trump issued an executive order disqualifying sanctuary cities from obtaining certain federal grants, but in 2018 the courts ruled that this was unconstitutional overreach. Trump is determined to build a large wall along the U.S.-Mexico border, and he declared a national emergency over the issue when Congress refused to authorize the $5.7 billion Trump wanted for the wall in its budget. Democrats argue the wall would be an ineffective and expensive, and that declaring a national emergency is nothing but a political gimmick over a crisis that does not exist. Declaring a national emergency allows Trump to bypass Congress and redirect funds designated for other purposes, such as military construction. While the president has the authority to declare a national emergency, whether the situation at the border constitutes one remains a question, and it is already facing several court challenges.