San Francisco City Board of Supervisors Member David Campos has made a proposal that undocumented juveniles (read Latino criminals) not be referred by the city to federal immigration officials, in direct controversion of Federal law.
Let's put this in perspective. Campos arrived in America at age 14, an illegal alien who grew up in the barrio of South Central Los Angeles. Taking advantage of the opportunities afforded by the American education system, Campos qualified for scholarships through college and law school. Moving to San Francisco, he capitalized on his minority roots to build a constituency out of the Latino community.
Now, positioned in the City government, he's using his authority to further the aims of the immigrant community, by softening statutes and regulations designed to control illegals.
The City has been the target of criticism for its policy of shielding illegals from immigration officials, following a triple murder by a Mexican illegal set free by the city authorities. The mayor's office has warned the supervisors that if they push the illegal "sanctuary city" position too far, they risk inviting unfavorable rulings at the Federal level if anti-immigrant advocates sue the city.
What are Campos's ultimate aims? Obviously, he believes--as many contemporary Hispanic politicians do--that his political future depends on his using his Latino background to build support in a growing constituency of legal and illegal South and Central Americans. It is clear that he will use whatever political clout he eventually acquires to represent the causes and agendas of the Latino community, even if those policies cause harm, or are not supported in the general population.
This is a pernicious evil perpetrated upon the citizens of California, and Americans in general. Campos exploited a generous and tolerant American society for personal gain. How does he demonstrate his gratitude? By representing the interests of foreign nationals seeking to follow the same illegal path he did.
Campos deserves everyone's repudiation. There's nothing admirable about him. He's a political carpetbagger; a virus, an infection upon the body politic. He's a pest, and should be treated as such.