Immigration alliance looks to Prince William as standard

By CHERYL K. CHUMLEY
Published: April 23, 2008

Prince William County’s immigration policy is the “gold standard” from which other concerned jurisdictions should draw insight, said the president of a nonprofit group headquartered in Washington, D.C., that uses the courts to compel openness and transparency in governments.

“[The policy] looks to be progressing wonderfully,” said Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, in an interview about his organization’s role in helping form a coalition against illegal immigration, and how Prince William has inspired that effort. “The laws are being enforced in Prince William County … and the goal is to mimic that regionally.”

Ten grass-root groups, including Help Save Manassas, joined forces and announced a few days ago the creation of the Capital Area Alliance Against Illegal Immigration.

“The Alliance opposes sanctuary policies and will work toward the elimination of all taxpayer funded programs, organizations, services and benefits utilized to encourage and sustain illegal immigration in the capital region,” a press release posted at the Judicial Watch site reads.

The Alliance members are American Border Patrol, Defend DC, Help Save Loudoun, Help Save Manassas, Help Save Maryland, Judicial Watch, Maryland Minuteman CDC, Save the Old Dominion, Vienna Citizens’ Coalition, and Virginia Minuteman CDC.

Help Save Manassas president Greg Letiecq described the idea behind the collaboration as akin to the principle that no man is an island.

“We know criminal illegal aliens don’t respect boundaries,” he said. “There’s a lot of instances where just fixing Prince William County isn’t all that needs to get done to protect the safety of Prince William residents. Obviously, we have to protect other areas.”

But Alanna Almeda, who just started a blog to counter immigration views put forth on Letiecq’s Web site – Almeda’s is the anti-Black Velvet Bruce Li to Letiecq’s longer-standing Black Velvet Bruce Li – sees racism at play and cautioned other jurisdictions against mimicking Prince William policy.

“It would be a grave mistake for any locality to follow what Prince William’s done,” Almeda said. “Prince William’s [policy has] given people a justification for their deep seeded racial feelings … and no, I don’t believe it has anything to do with the legality.”

Almeda said she doesn’t believe everyone who supported the Prince William immigration resolution was necessarily racist, but rather “misguided” and uninformed.

“Economically, this policy has been a disaster,” she said. “Look at the double digit housing loss. And socially, it’s been extremely divisive. It’s not been a success, it’s been a curse … and I think there’s a racial component.”

To Fitton, though, accusations of racism are just part and parcel of enforcing immigration law – expected attacks driven by special interests, he said.

“Prince William is the gold standard in terms of what communities need to be doing,” he said, adding that enforcement of illegal alien policy is sound law that also protects immigrants from violence that goes unreported within their communities. “But they’re being criticized by individuals and groups with specific agendas, and it’s usually outsiders.”

Meanwhile, at citizen’s time at Tuesday’s supervisor meeting, the immigration resolution and the ability of police to check the immigration status of those arrested for crimes were once again hot button topics for comment.

While plenty several spoke in support of funding the immigration policy in this year’s upcoming fiscal budget, several others asked the board to reconsider – in one instance, drawing parallels between the supervisors, their support of the resolution and the Ku Klux Klan, and in another, calling on the county to “welcome the sojourner” as “God’s judgment is upon us.”

Staff writer Cheryl Chumley can be reached at 703-670-1907.