By: Eli M. Gold, President

Let me be clear, I have firm views on illegal immigration. In cases where illegal immigrants are convicted of serious violent crimes such as murder or rape, I believe the penalties should be as severe as possible, including the death penalty. For non-violent offenses, taxpayers should not have to shoulder the cost of long-term incarceration—swift deportation is the better and more practical solution. My concerns about sanctuary cities, however, are less about immigration status and far more about the policies that govern criminal justice. The real threat to public safety is both in how these cities manage offenders—by releasing repeat and violent criminals regardless of status—and in the reality that many among the undocumented population do add to criminality and recidivism. While some migrants seek a better life, data from federal agencies shows that thousands of illegals are arrested or convicted each year for a range of offenses, including serious crimes such as assault, weapons violations, and homicide. With criminal aliens representing a substantial share of ICE removals, their presence and the criminal acts of a subset within this group are pressing concerns when it comes to urban safety.

In practice, the cities most affected by rising crime and recidivism are those led predominantly by Democratic state and local governments. Policy changes—including the removal of California’s Three Strikes law, the abandonment of Broken Windows policing in New York, the reduction or outright elimination of Qualified Immunity for police, and the implementation of cashless bail—have dramatically weakened accountability. Habitual and violent offenders, including those here illegally, know the consequences for repeated offenses are now much less severe. The withdrawal from Broken Windows policing, once credited with the steep drop in New York’s violent crime throughout the 1990s, has instead allowed an environment in which lower-level crimes are ignored, often opening the door to more major criminal acts. Cashless bail policies compounded the issue by creating a revolving door for repeat offenders—many with extensive criminal records—who are arrested and released within hours, only to offend again. Poorly conceived policies in Democrat-run states have enabled rising rates of recidivism, undermining progress made in reducing crime.

The role of governmental policy is directly matched by the impact of the criminal element within the undocumented population. Federal data for 2025 confirms that a meaningful percentage of illegal aliens have been arrested or convicted for more serious crimes, and these numbers are felt most strongly in the urban centers where law enforcement practices are most constrained by progressive policies. Even as some studies show that immigrants overall may not commit more crimes than native-born Americans, the criminal activity of a subset of migrants remains a stubborn reality in shaping the frequency and severity of recidivism.

This dynamic is best seen in New York City, where the mayoral race is being shaped by policy proposals widely considered radical. Frontrunner Zohran Mamdani, supported by progressive groups and running on a Democratic Socialist platform, has publicly pledged to abolish punishments for misdemeanors altogether, stating the city's police should not waste resources on enforcing minor crimes like theft or shoplifting under $1,000, drug possession, assault without weapons, or drunk driving. According to the New York Post, Mamdani declared, “While police play a vital role, we are currently depending on them to address the shortcomings of our social safety net, which hinders their ability to perform their actual duties”. Local critics warned his proposals would operate as “an E-ZPass for criminals,” encouraging repeated offending while eroding the fundamental sense of order for law-abiding residents. New Yorkers like Chelsea resident Alexander Kaplan have responded, to the New York Post with disbelief: “It’s just difficult to imagine how adults in their right mind could come up with it. I’m not exaggerating, I’m completely serious,” he said. “We’re already suffering from terrible crime. This is going to make it a thousand times worse. And perception matters – just the notion of this would embolden criminals.” If elected, Mamdani could instruct the NYPD to deprioritize such arrests or pressure district attorneys to refrain from prosecuting certain cases, echoing controversial strategies employed in other cities.

While some urban areas struggle with these progressive policy experiments, President Trump’s recent takeover of Washington, DC’s public safety response and the expanded role of the National Guard have produced striking results in the fight against urban crime. By assuming control of the city’s police department and deploying 800 National Guard members, Trump announced, “I am announcing a historic initiative to save our nation’s capital from crime, chaos, disorder, and destitution”. Since federal intervention, the city recorded an unprecedented streak—13 days without a murder—an achievement widely hailed as a historic turnaround for a city previously plagued by gun violence and high homicide rates. According to The Hill, between August 14 and August 26, 2025, Washington, DC saw zero homicides, with just two murders documented since Trump’s assumption of police control on August 11, underscoring the impact of federal oversight and enhanced security protocols.

The broader impact includes a 22% drop in overall violent crime since the National Guard’s arrival, with robberies down by 46%, carjackings down 83%, and car thefts by 21%. Trump’s repeated emphasis has been clear: “We are witnessing a situation of utter lawlessness ... this is liberation day in D.C., and we will reclaim our capital”. He has hinted at plans to expand this model to other cities, arguing, “Consider the murder rate in D.C.; it compares with some of the most dangerous cities globally. … In just ten days, crime has decreased by over 35 percent in the capital, thanks to Donald J. Trump’s actions”.

U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro has strongly endorsed these aggressive measures. On Fox News, Pirro said, “We’re not going to tolerate crime that is out of control in the nation’s capital ... This is the shining city on the hill that our forefathers talked about ... and in the end, it is an incredibly violent area”. Pirro dismissed official narratives that crime is down, pointing to the real victims and their families, and said, “You tell the mother of the intern who was shot going out for McDonald’s near the Washington Convention Center, ‘Oh, crime is down’”. She advocated for tough city and youth sentencing laws to ensure dangerous offenders are properly removed from the streets.

President Trump’s initiative in Washington, DC stands as a rare example of federal action producing rapid and significant reductions in violent crime. As national debates rage over lenient policies, cashless bail, and proposals to decriminalize misdemeanors—like those advanced by New York City mayoral frontrunner Mamdani—the dramatic improvements in DC offer a glimpse of what robust enforcement and expanded law enforcement roles can achieve for public safety. The lessons are clear: poorly constructed policies by Democrat-led state and city governments, paired with the documented criminal element among illegal entrants—and advocates pushing for even greater leniency—remain central reasons for persistent recidivism and the rise of crime in America’s urban centers, while strong deterrence and accountability are crucial for reversing these trends.

Eli M. Gold is the president of the Gold Institute for International Strategy, a Washington, DC based think-and-do tank.