Undocumented immigrants are caught between Pilate and the mob calling for their crucifixion, justice or fairness does not even enter the picture.

The Obama administration boasts record high deportations resulting, by its own admission, from "tough law enforcement" as stated by DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano.   Fair enforcement of law is not a matter of "toughness" or "laxity".

 

Touting 392,000 removals for the fiscal year the DHS claims this figure includes "unprecedented numbers of convicted criminal aliens" (nearly 50 percent or 195,000).  The fact is that only 7,000 or 1.7 percent of those "convicted criminal aliens" had actually committed violent crimes. The bulk of the deported were "convicted" for the sole act of entering, re-entering, or even overstaying in the U.S. without a proper visa.

The U.S. Supreme Court already expressed feeling wary of a government incapable of distinguishing a petty offense from aggravated felony and slammed it for its "unorthodox" and "counterintuitive" interpretation of the law.

This travesty of justice became apparent thanks to detention and deportation databases as well as internal communications within Homeland Security urging field officers to increase deportation quotas, all made public thanks to the Freedom of Information Act. 

Now the Obama administration, breaking its own promise of "openness in Government", will deny access to detailed information –including specific criminal charges. This denial affects educational institutions such as Syracuse University.  Topping abuse of authority with cynicism the government offered Syracuse University to disclose some information in exchange for $450,000 dollars.

The mounting evidence of the distorted portrayal of immigrants as violent criminals is met with indifference by mainstream media.

The converse is also true.  Should an immigrant be murdered, little is said and much is justified.

Take for example the murder of Luis Ramirez in Shenandoah Pa. While the Department of Justice is attempting to set the record straight by leveling charges for crimes against Ramirez' civil rights, Elmer Smith, a Daily News columnist in Philadelphia, calls it "twisted justice".

Mr. Smith's disclaimer is that he has "never been a fan of hate-crime prosecutions". Interestingly this defiant columnist states "even the fact that these two men might get away with murder is not enough to change my mind".

Such a gratuitous tirade cannot be dignified as if it were principled; here we have a columnist resenting the very notion that a "Mexican immigrant" could invoke any civil rights whatsoever.

"Twisted justice" in the eyes of a prophet of old is to call "evil good, and good evil", and to the disgruntled columnist's chagrin "twisted" is his delusion that civil rights are meant to protect one race or ethnic group but not the other.