As a farewell gift to her successor, outgoing Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot has declared a state of emergency in Chicago due to the number of migrants. Greg Hinz reports at Crain’s Chicago Business:
With more and more refugees again arriving in Chicago, outgoing Mayor Lori Lightfoot today released what amounts to a loud and public appeal for help, declaring a state of emergency.
In a statement, the mayor’s office said, “The City of Chicago is in the midst of a national humanitarian crisis, and through a unified effort in accordance with its values as a welcoming city, Chicago is doing everything it can to respond to the urgency of this matter.”
and
The immediate legal impact of the measure was not immediately clear. Neither the White House nor Gov. J.B. Pritzker’s office had any immediate response. But the move clearly ups the political stakes for both, as well as incoming Mayor-elect Brandon Johnson.
The declaration states that Lightfoot reserves the right to ask Pritzker for mobilization of the National Guard “to provide staffing and logistical support to address this emergency in the City of Chicago.”
During an afternoon press conference, her first since losing her re-election bid, Lightfoot said that she’s not now asking for the national guard and “commend(ed)” Pritzker for his help. But, she added, “There may be a point where we need additional resources in the form of the national guard…(running) spaces that can handle hundreds of people at a time.”
Lightfoot insisted the city has been planning for a surge for weeks, but, “Chicago simply does not now have the infrastructure or the resources to continue… the burden can’t rest on our city alone.”
The order, she said, will allow all of the city’s agencies to “do whatever is feasible and necessary.”
There’s no actual plan in place.
This is not a city or state problem. I’m sure that El Paso and McAllen are in equally serious shape.
It’s a federal problem and the federal government has been too slow in addressing it. Governors should be suing the federal government and the president.
The sad irony is that neither political “side” has any answers.
Chicago, NYC, et al. get a few hundred symbolic migrants, and El Pase, Brownsville, et al., get tens of thousands.
What a joke these Northerners are.
Chicago accepted about 10,000 last year. But I agree with your point. That’s 10,000 out of 2 million.
“Chicago accepted about 10,000 last year. ”
Chicago doesn’t get a say. No state or locality has the authority to accept or not accept them.
Once these asylum-seekers enter the country and are initially processed with a court date, they can go where they please. For those not in the country legally, many states and localities (including Chicago IIRC), have laws that prevent authorities from handing them over for deportation, so the result is the same.
Most of these immigrants want jobs and will go wherever they think they can get jobs or assistance, and big cities are high on that list.
In theory that’s correct. In practice something quite different is happening. They’re being bused from border towns to New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, etc. whether they want to go to those places or not, whether there are jobs for them or not.
I can’t tell you what’s happening in other places but in Chicago they’re being housed “temporarily” in practically any available space—hotel rooms, shuttered schools, police stations, bus stations, train stations, etc. Hundreds of millions have been spent accommodating them.
Nobody really knows how long “temporary” is. It may be indefinitely.
The notion that they’re “asylum seekers” as defined in the Immigration and Naturalization Act is laughable—they’re job-seekers. As such they’re harming the low-wage workers already here.
“They’re being bused from border towns to New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, etc. whether they want to go to those places or not, whether there are jobs for them or not.”
With a very few high-profile exceptions, like the DeSantis Martha’s Vineyard Stunt, migrants getting on these busses know where they are going and are choosing to go. Many others take Greyhound or other transportation thanks to money from relatives or aid agencies.
“The notion that they’re “asylum seekers†as defined in the Immigration and Naturalization Act is laughable—they’re job-seekers. As such they’re harming the low-wage workers already here.”
In terms of reality, you are right, but in terms of their legal status, they are asylum seekers, and therefore they have free access to go wherever they want and in the US. Many want to go to the major cities in the US and there is really nothing those cities can do to stop them.
In terms of reality I’m right and in terms of the law I am right as well. The INA states the criteria for asylum quite clearly. Wanting a job, domestic abuse, crime, or poverty are not criteria for asylum under the law. Our political leaders are ignoring the law.
They are asylum seekers which Andy gets correct. They need to have a hearing at which time they are granted asylum or sent back. At that time it is determined if they are here for the reasons you cite. If you wan this changed you need to change the law or speed up the process.
Steve