Republican Rep. Derrick Van Orden has accused Democrats of putting Americans at risk by supporting sanctuary policies that limit cooperation between local authorities and federal immigration enforcement.
Van Orden, who represents Wisconsin’s 3rd Congressional District, made the remarks during an appearance on Newsmax, where he argued that sanctuary policies give protection to immigrants who are in the United States illegally and have been accused or convicted of crimes.
Van Orden Says Americans Are Being Put at Risk
Van Orden argued that Democratic leaders supporting sanctuary policies are prioritising undocumented immigrants over American citizens who become victims of crimes.
The Wisconsin Republican said the issue was not simply about immigration, but also about public safety and whether local authorities should cooperate with federal immigration officials when individuals accused or convicted of crimes come into contact with the criminal justice system.
His comments reflect a broader Republican argument that sanctuary jurisdictions make it more difficult for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to take custody of certain immigrants after they are released from local or state custody.
Democrats and immigration advocates, however, generally argue that sanctuary policies are intended to build trust between immigrant communities and local law enforcement and to prevent local police from becoming an extension of federal immigration enforcement.
Immigration Enforcement Becomes Midterm Flashpoint
The dispute comes as immigration enforcement remains one of the most politically divisive issues ahead of the 2026 U.S. midterm elections.
The Trump administration has continued its aggressive immigration crackdown while pressing states and local governments to cooperate more closely with federal authorities.
The Justice Department recently warned states that they could face serious consequences, including the potential loss of federal funding, if they fail to comply with new requirements to report information about people who are unlawfully present in the United States. The administration’s position has already prompted concerns and potential legal challenges from Democratic-led states.
The development has intensified the longstanding battle between the federal government and so-called sanctuary jurisdictions.
Van Orden Points to Crime and Victims
Van Orden has sought to frame the debate around victims, arguing that Americans should not be placed at greater risk because of policies restricting cooperation with federal immigration authorities. His remarks also referenced concerns raised by Marcus Coleman, whose daughter suffered life-altering injuries in a crash that authorities and Republican officials have associated with an undocumented immigrant driver.
Van Orden used the case to argue that immigration enforcement policies should take into account the experiences of American families affected by crimes involving people who are unlawfully in the country.
However, individual criminal cases do not by themselves establish that sanctuary policies generally cause crime or that undocumented immigrants as a group pose a greater public-safety threat. Those broader claims remain part of an intensely contested political debate.
Sanctuary Policies Under Republican Attack
Republicans have increasingly targeted sanctuary cities and states as part of their broader immigration agenda.
The Trump administration and congressional Republicans have argued that local governments should not prevent federal immigration authorities from accessing individuals who are subject to immigration enforcement. In New York, for example, federal immigration authorities recently carried out a large enforcement operation that resulted in more than 2,000 arrests, while federal officials accused state and city leaders of making immigration enforcement more difficult through sanctuary policies. New York officials have defended their approach as necessary to protect residents and maintain local control over policing.
The conflict highlights the fundamental disagreement between Republicans and Democrats over the role of local governments in federal immigration enforcement.
Democrats Push Back
Democratic officials and immigrant-rights advocates have generally rejected the Republican characterization that sanctuary policies are designed to protect criminals. They argue that local law enforcement agencies should be able to focus on investigating and preventing crimes without making immigration status the central consideration in routine policing.
Supporters also contend that immigrants are more likely to cooperate with police when they do not fear that reporting a crime or speaking with officers could trigger immigration enforcement against themselves or members of their families. The debate therefore extends beyond immigration policy into questions about federalism, policing, public safety and the relationship between federal and local governments.
Immigration Takes Centre Stage Ahead of Midterms
With the November 2026 midterm elections approaching, immigration is likely to remain a major issue for both parties.
Republicans are seeking to make border enforcement, deportations and sanctuary policies central components of their campaign message, while Democrats are expected to challenge the administration’s enforcement tactics and focus on due process, civil liberties and the economic and social consequences of mass immigration enforcement.
For Van Orden, the political argument is straightforward: he says government policy should prioritise the safety of American citizens and victims of crime. But Democrats and immigration advocates are likely to continue challenging that framing, setting the stage for another fierce political battle over immigration before voters head to the polls. OGM News will continue to monitor the U.S. immigration debate, sanctuary policies and the 2026 midterm elections.
[…] […]