Joey BunchJoey BunchAugust 27, 20176min579

Rep. Dave Williams is accusing Denver Mayor Michael Hancock of pandering to the “alt left” with a city policy not to help enforce federal immigration laws. The Republican from Colorado Springs is calling on President Trump to crack down on Denver.

The Denver City Council is set to vote Monday night on the Public Safety Enforcement Priorities Act,  proposed by the mayor policy “to reduce fear within the immigrant community and clarify for everyone that Denver is not engaging in immigration enforcement.”

“Your support for this so-called ‘public safety’ ordinance is troubling to say the least,” Williams wrote to Hancock, according to the letter dated Aug. 22 that Williams provided to the Colorado Springs Gazette. “After reading the proposed measure and considering its merits, one can easily determine that this is nothing more than attempt by your office to pander to the alt-left and other open border (sic) militants, while further endangering citizens and lawful immigrants who reside in Colorado.”

Hancock dismissed Williams’ assertion Sunday.

“We are not going to engage in an obvious effort by Mr. Williams to create some headlines for himself,” Hancock told Colorado Politics Sunday. “Should he care to educate himself on the ordinance and why it does not violate federal law, we are glad to refer him to Google search. With a little effort, he would clearly see Denver is taking positive actions to unite people and protect their rights, safety and contributions to our city.”

This month, when the proposal was announced, Hancock said, “With these next steps, Denver will send a clear message that every person, no matter their immigration status, can feel safe when interacting with the city and law enforcement, and know that our No. 1 priority is the safety and health of everyone in Denver.”

In addition to the ordinance Hancock supports, his office said he is working on an executive order on the same subject to:

  • Create a legal defense fund for immigrant
  • Create a working group of experts, stakeholders and city staff to track the impact of Denver policies.
  • Make sure city employees and law enforcement get training on laws and legal rights.
  • Teach immigrants and refugees about their rights.
  • “Protect victims and witnesses regardless of their immigration status.”
  • Assist children and families who are separated because of deportation.

The U.S. Constitution vests immigration enforcement with federal agencies, primarily Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Those, like Williams, who oppose policies that make it easier for undocumented residents to remain in the U.S. illegally, say local governments should not adopt policies that could make it harder for federal agents to do their jobs, however.

In the last legislative session Williams sponsored a bill that would have allowed government officials in jurisdictions deemed “sanctuary cities” to be arrested or sued for violent crimes committed by undocumented residents. He cited Denver, Aurora and Boulder.

“It’s pretty obvious this bill violates the U.S. Constitution,” Denise Maes, public policy director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Colorado, said at the time. “Fourth Amendment rights are fundamental foundations of our democracy, and this bill is contrary to that.”

She and other opponents argued that immigrants would be less likely to report crimes they witness or are the victims of, if they are afraid to talk to police because of immigration status.

Williams went on to write in his letter to Hancock last week, “It is disgraceful that you would rather pander to the radical, alt-left special interests by promoting unlawful activity while refusing to protect or even acknowledge the victims of illegal immigration.”

In another letter dated two days later, on Thursday, Williams told Trump he is a Latino lawmaker and wants the president to assign additional resources to Colorado to block “sanctuary city politicians who are attempting to pass policies that will attract more criminals to Colorado.”

He concluded the letter, “It is clear that Denver officials are determined to allow criminals to run loose on the streets and deny Coloradans their rights to safety and justice. As such, your administration is our best hope to stop this lawless behavior.”

President Trump has proposed deputizing local law enforcement to help, however. He also has proposed withholding tax dollars from sanctuary cities.

Editor’s note: This story was corrected to say that Hancock’s executive order would further extend the proposed ordinance, but his order on the same subject is not part of the ordinance that he supports.



Joey BunchJoey BunchFebruary 23, 20176min490
House Democrats predictably killed a Republican bill to hold elected officials responsible for crimes committed by undocumented immigrants in a sanctuary city. The State, Veterans and Military Affairs Committee heard six hours of testimony that swung from anger toward undocumented immigrants to a defense of them and human rights. Opponents saw the bill as a step toward […]

This content is only available to subscribers.

Login or Subscribe


karla-gonzales-garcia.jpg

John TomasicJohn TomasicFebruary 22, 20176min589

Civil rights protesters gathered Wednesday at the Capitol to protest the “Colorado Politician Accountability Act,” a hot-button Republican House bill being heard in the House State Affairs committee. The bill, <a href="http://leg.colorado.gov/bills/hb17-1134" target="_blank">HB 1134</a>, is sponsored by Colorado Springs freshman Rep. Dave Williams. It taps into the harsh view of so-called sanctuary policies that marked the Trump presidential campaign last year and dovetails with the immigration and deportation executive order issued by the president this week.


Sen.-Tim-Neville-.jpg

John TomasicJohn TomasicFebruary 21, 20175min431

State Sen. Tim Neville, a Littleton Republican, was determined to send his hot-button campus free speech bill to the lower chamber with strong support from Democrats as well as Republicans — and he succeeded. Senate Bill 62 is a response to the war around expression being waged largely by conservative media outlets who think speech on campuses has been stunted by political correctness at one end of the spectrum and downright censored by administrative restrictions at the other end.


berkeley-protest.jpg

John TomasicJohn TomasicFebruary 16, 20174min380

In Colorado, sponsors call the legislative proposal a “campus free speech bill.” Sponsors in Tennessee call their version the “<a href="http://www.tennessean.com/story/news/politics/2017/02/09/breitbarts-milo-yiannopolous-inspires-tennessee-free-speech-bill/97690656/" target="_blank">Milo Bill</a>,” after Milo Yiannopoulos, the right-wing provocateur and Breitbart News editor, whose deliberately offensive college speaking appearances have often generated protest and occasionally violence. Colorado’s <a href="https://www.coloradostatesman.com/campus-free-speech/" target="_blank">Senate Bill 62</a> is being sponsored by libertarian-conservative Tim Neville, a Littleton Republican. It has yet to attract a Democratic co-sponsor but, a little more than a week ago, it did win over the three Democrats who sit on the Senate education committee. It moved to the floor of the Senate on a unanimous vote.


free-speech-cafe.jpg

John TomasicJohn TomasicFebruary 10, 20175min481

State Rep. Stephen Humphrey is feeling optimistic that Democrats and liberal interest groups will join with Republicans and conservative interest groups to support the campus free speech bill he’s sponsoring this year with Sen. Tim Neville. “I haven’t counted any votes yet, but I haven’t heard anyone say they have major concerns,” Humphrey said in an interview on Wednesday. “I think once people heard what the bill was really about, they were like, ‘Well, there are no bogey men in the bill.’ They found out it’s really about free speech and not restricting it to some postage stamp area in a corner of the campus, which I think we can all agree is a good idea.” The bill, <a href="http://leg.colorado.gov/bills/sb17-062" target="_blank">SB 62</a>, contains free speech protections and free assembly protections on college campuses, which is a factual but benign way to describe it. It’s also a bill that taps into a national cultural battle that has seen conservative cable news pundits clash with university students and administrators in recent years.