How Chicago has managed the migrant influx: A deep dive before Johnson's congressional hearing
The Brief
Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson will testify before Congress about the city's sanctuary policies, following a request from the House Committee on Oversight and Reform.
Since August 2022, over 51,000 migrants have arrived in Chicago, leading to significant financial expenditures, with the city spending $638.7 million on migrant aid.
Chicago has faced controversies regarding the establishment of migrant shelters in various neighborhoods, including the West Town and Woodlawn areas.
CHICAGO - Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson will testify before Congress this week about the city's status as a sanctuary city.
The appearance follows a formal request from the House Committee on Oversight and Reform, which sent a letter to City Hall last month asking Johnson to participate in a public hearing on Capitol Hill.
The letter raised concerns about the impact of sanctuary policies in Chicago, as well as in New York, Boston and Denver.
RELATED:Why is Brandon Johnson testifying before Congress?
Johnson has said he would defend the people of Chicago and comply with the 2017 Illinois Trust Act, which prohibits local law enforcement from participating in federal immigration enforcement.
Ahead of Johnson's testimony, here's a detailed look at migrant arrivals and key developments since 2022.
By the numbers
Since Aug. 31, 2022, over 51,000 migrants have arrived in Chicago from the southern border.
From August 2022 to December 2024, the city reported 946 buses arriving with asylum seekers.
Of these, 602 buses arrived at the city's designated "Landing Zone," while 344 buses and two planes brought additional arrivals since November 2024.
As of December 2024:
Total Individuals Seeking Asylum Arriving via Texas Buses & Airplane: 51,648
Total Individuals Seeking Asylum Arriving via Airplane Since June 2023: 5,209
Total Bus Arrivals in Chicagoland Area Since 8/31/2022: 946
Total Individuals Resettled: 17,183
Total Individuals Reunited with Sponsors: 7,689
Total Shelter Census: 2,487
Total Awaiting Placement: 0
Money Spent
Chicago has allocated significant funds to support migrants arriving in the city since August 2022. As of February, Chicago has spent $638.7 million on migrant aid.
Funding sources include:
American Rescue Plan Act: $94 million
City Corporate Fund: $268,163,828
Cook County Asylum Seeker Grant: $36,620,606
Federal Health Grant: $1,568,730
FEMA Asylum Seeker Grants: $87,522,646
State Asylum Seeker Grants: $149,862,603
City officials and residents have debated the sustainability of such spending and its impact on local communities.
To address ongoing needs, the city launched the "One System Initiative" in December 2024, unifying migrant and homeless shelters into a single support network.
The transition included adding 3,800 beds to the Department of Family and Support Services' current capacity and eliminating 30-day shelter extensions.
Mayor Johnson described this initiative as a "cost-effective, equitable, and strategic approach" to addressing homelessness while responding to the decline in new migrant arrivals.
PREVIOUS STORY: Migrants in Chicago: State funds hotel stays for hundreds of asylum seekers amid 'unprecedented' influx
The city said a five-year plan was being created to enhance services for unhoused residents.
Funding has also been a contentious issue in Chicago, with many local groups questioning how the city could suddenly allocate millions of dollars for new arrivals while long-standing community needs go unmet.
In 2024, Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker announced plans to spend an additional $182 million in state funds to address the growing number of migrants in Chicago and Cook County. Republican lawmakers pushed back, arguing that the state should prioritize its citizens over new arrivals.
Instead, Republicans called for increased funding for health care, law enforcement, and homeownership programs for residents.
RELATED:
Chicago aldermen push for more funding amid reports of migrants sleeping inside police stations
Chicago City Council approves $51M for migrant aid
Chicago mayor on migrant crisis: 'Entire country is now at stake' without significant assistance from Biden
Chicago's efforts to accommodate an influx of migrants sparked various controversies over the years, particularly concerning the establishment of shelters in different neighborhoods.
The backstory
In West Town, a building near Western and Ohio was repurposed to house migrant families in November 2023.
Despite legal challenges from local residents aiming to halt the move-in, a judge denied the request for a temporary restraining order.
Migrant families began relocating to the facility, which had undergone renovations to add more bathroom facilities. Prior to this, many of the migrants had been living in tents or police station lobbies.
READ MORE HERE
The backstory
The decision to convert the former Wadsworth Elementary School in Woodlawn into a migrant shelter was met with significant opposition.
Residents and local leaders expressed frustration over the lack of community consultation.
Alderman Jeanette Taylor highlighted that the city proceeded without engaging the community, leading to protests and activists camping outside the facility.
Concerns centered around resource allocation and the potential impact on the neighborhood.
The Wadsworth building once had more than 500 students in attendance when it was active. In February 2023, city officials said 250 adult migrants moved in.
READ MORE HERE
The backstory
Plans to erect a migrant tent shelter in Brighton Park led to heated community meetings.
Residents voiced strong objections, feeling excluded from the decision-making process.
Tensions escalated to the point where Alderman Julia Ramirez and her aide were physically attacked during a protest against the shelter.
In December 2023, Governor J.B. Pritzker halted construction after environmental reviews revealed significant contamination, including elevated levels of mercury and arsenic in the soil.
PREVIOUS STORY: Pressure mounts on Chicago mayor as costs for failed Brighton Park migrant site reach nearly $1M
Despite initial assurances from city officials that remediation efforts had rendered the site safe for temporary residential use, the state decided to discontinue plans for the shelter due to these environmental concerns.
Following the cancelation, several City Council members called for the resignation of officials involved in the failed project, criticizing the lack of transparency and collaboration with the community.
READ MORE HERE
What we know
In January 2024, Chicago officials announced that they were 'pausing' efforts to open additional shelters and relying on the state to create more beds.
To stay within its 'New Arrivals Mission' budget, a spokesperson for Mayor Brandon Johnson said at the time that the city was turning its focus to "outmigration and resettlement services."
As migrants found more permanent housing, officials said space was becoming available in the city's 28 shelters.
PREVIOUS ARTICLE: Chicago 'pauses' new migrant shelters
The backstory
A migrant shelter in the Pilsen neighborhood was linked to the majority of measles cases in an outbreak that began in early March 2024.
These cases marked the first reported instances of measles in Chicago since 2019. About half of the cases involved children under 5 years old.
By April 2024, the City of Chicago reported a significant decline in measles cases following the implementation of a vaccination campaign aimed at individuals lacking protection.
Measles, characterized by symptoms such as high fever, cough, runny nose, red or watery eyes, and a rash, is highly contagious. The rash typically appears three to five days after the onset of symptoms, and individuals exposed to measles may remain asymptomatic for one to two weeks.
The backstory
In December 2023, Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson announced stricter penalties for bus companies that failed to comply with the city's guidelines when transporting migrants from the southern border.
The proposed rule aimed to impose penalties on private bus operators who did not comply with specified rules regarding the location and timing of migrant drop-offs. Violations of the established rules could result in fines ranging from $2,000 to $10,000.
MORE:Chicago looks to implement stricter rules for migrant bus operators
In response, some bus operators began bypassing Chicago, opting to drop off passengers in suburban areas instead.
Elburn: In December 2023, a bus carrying 38 migrants made an unannounced stop in Elburn. The village board responded by approving an ordinance to restrict "unscheduled intercity buses."
Lockport: Migrants were dropped off at a Metra station without prior notice in December 2023. Local police coordinated with the Office of Emergency Management and Communications to transport the migrants to Chicago.
Fox River Grove: A bus from Texas left 38 migrants at a Metra station after midnight, misleading them to believe they were in Chicago. Local authorities provided temporary shelter and facilitated their travel to the city.
Peotone and Kankakee: Migrants were found walking along highways after being dropped off without guidance. In Kankakee, a bus driver falsely informed passengers they had arrived in Chicago, leaving them stranded at a gas station.
Hinsdale: The village received 11 migrant buses over 11 days, prompting officials to impose fines of $750 per passenger for unannounced bus arrivals.
RELATED:Chicago-area migrant bus battle intensifies as more towns crack down
To manage the situation, several suburban municipalities implemented measures to regulate migrant accommodations.
Elk Grove Village introduced an ordinance prohibiting hotel and motel owners from housing individuals without medical documentation confirming they are free from contagious diseases within the past 60 days. This rule exempts those who have resided in the U.S. for at least a year.
Additionally, the ordinance restricts warehouse owners from converting their buildings into temporary housing facilities.
Similarly, Schaumburg enacted a tax on hotel stays exceeding 30 days to deter the prolonged housing of migrants in local hotels. This decision aimed to protect the village's convention business and address residents' concerns.
What's next
Mayor Johnson's upcoming testimony before Congress will likely address both the city's response to the migrant crisis and the broader impact of sanctuary city policies.
Dig deeper
One of the policies Johnson will likely discuss is the Welcoming City Ordinance, which stops city agencies and employees from getting involved in civil immigration enforcement or helping federal authorities with such efforts.
The ordinance outlines specific restrictions, including the following:
Agencies and agents cannot stop, arrest or detain individuals based solely on their immigration status or an administrative warrant, such as those found in the FBI's National Crime Information Center database.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents cannot access detainees or use city facilities for investigative purposes.
City employees are restricted from spending time responding to ICE inquiries about a person's custody status, release date, or contact information unless it is to determine whether a situation involves solely civil immigration violations.
Agencies are barred from entering agreements under federal law that allow local entities to enforce federal civil immigration law.
The transfer of individuals into ICE custody for the purpose of civil immigration enforcement is prohibited.
City resources cannot be used to assist civil immigration operations, such as setting up traffic perimeters or providing on-site support.
CPD has to follow certain protocols when ICE or other federal agencies ask for help.
Supervisors are responsible for figuring out if the request is about civil immigration enforcement. If it is, they have to decline the request and notify the Office of Emergency Management and Communications.
Chicago also has rules in place to limit how city agencies handle information about people's immigration or citizenship status.
For example, agencies can't ask for, keep, or share this information unless federal law, a court order, or a warrant says they have to. There are some exceptions, like if someone gives written permission or if the city's legal team needs it for certain legal matters.
Also, applications and forms for city services can't ask about someone's citizenship or immigration status. Departments need to check and update these forms every year to make sure they're following the rules.
Finally, federal agencies can't access city databases or data-sharing platforms if they're trying to enforce civil immigration laws.
The Source
The information in this article came from previous FOX 32 Chicago coverage along with information from the city of Chicago's website.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
42 minutes ago
- The Hill
Good news: We've already been king-free for 810 years. But there's also bad news.
Resistance to tyranny, suspicion of concentrated power, and a firm belief in the democratic ideals that birthed this republic. It's a noble struggle. But for all their passion and theatrical flair, the historical literacy behind the 'No Kings Since 1776' slogan leaves much to be desired. In fact, the protestors missed the mark by several centuries. Yes, the U.S. declared independence from the British Crown in 1776. But the kind of 'king' these protesters seem to fear had already ceased to exist in Britain long before that. By the time George III ascended the throne, British kings were largely figureheads, bound by constitutional limits and dependent on Parliament to govern. The Glorious Revolution of 1688 had already drastically curtailed the powers of the monarchy. And indeed, if you want to pinpoint when monarchs lost their teeth, you need to look even further back, to 1215, when rebellious English barons forced King John to sign the Magna Carta. That document didn't create democracy, but it did begin a centuries-long process of transferring power away from the crown and into the hands of parliaments and assemblies. So, by the time the American colonies revolted, they were not really rising up against a tyrannical king, but against an unresponsive and overreaching Parliament. The rallying cry of the American Revolution — 'No taxation without representation' — wasn't an anti-monarchist slogan. It was an anti-parliamentarian slogan. The colonists didn't object to authority per se — they objected to being taxed and ruled by a body in which they had no voice. And they weren't demanding the abolition of kingship. They were demanding accountability, proportionality, and representation. They were asking for a seat at the table. Fast-forward to today, and that slogan might resonate more than ever. We don't live under a king, but we do live under a political system that often behaves as if it's immune to public influence. Our Congress — designed to be the voice of the people and a check on executive power — is frequently in lockstep with the president, regardless of which party is in office. Whether through partisan loyalty or political cowardice, our legislators often abdicate their role as a balancing force. They don't deliberate. They defer. They don't question. They rubber-stamp. The real issue isn't kingship but representation. And in the absence of real legislative independence, the presidency has become more monarchical than anything George III ever imagined. And this didn't start in 2025 or even in 2017. Every American president in modern history has wielded powers the British monarch couldn't have dreamed of: Executive orders, foreign military interventions without Congressional approval, surveillance regimes, and massive influence over the national budget. If protesters truly want to challenge creeping authoritarianism, the more accurate message would be: 'No taxation without genuine representation.' That would strike at the heart of the issue. If Congress does not act independently, if it does not reflect the interests and concerns of the people, then we are not truly being represented. And if we are not being represented, then why are we funding the machine? Of course, no one is seriously proposing that Americans stop paying taxes overnight. Civil disobedience has its limits. But protest must have a point, and slogans must have meaning. A movement that aims to hold power accountable must aim at the right target. 'No Kings' is, at best, historically inaccurate, and at worst, a distraction from the deeply rooted, troubling democratic predicament in which we find ourselves. A government system that would have the Founding Fathers turning in their graves. Imagine if all that energy, creativity, and public spirit were channeled instead into a campaign to restore Congressional independence, to demand term limits, to break the iron grip of lobbyists, to push for electoral reform, or to hold legislators to account for every vote they cast. That would be a revolution worth marching for. So, to the protesters in the streets: your instincts are right. Power must be kept in check. But your history is off, and your slogan is weak. Don't fear a king who never ruled you. Fear a Congress that no longer represents you. Daniel Friedman is professor of political science at Touro University.
Atlantic
an hour ago
- Atlantic
Right Move, Wrong Team
The rulers of Iran bet their regime on the 'Trump always chickens out' trade. They refused diplomacy. They got war. They chose their fate. They deserve everything that has happened to them. Only the world's most committed America-haters will muster sympathy for the self-destructive decision-making of a brutal regime. Striking Iran at this time and under these circumstances was the right decision by an administration and president that usually make the wrong one. An American president who does not believe in democracy at home has delivered an overwhelming blow in defense of a threatened democracy overseas. If a single night's action successfully terminates Trump's Iran war, and permanently ends the Iran nuclear bomb program, then Trump will have retroactively earned the birthday parade he gave himself on June 14. If not, this unilateral war under a president with dictatorial ambitions may lead the United States to some dark and repressive places. Trump did the right thing, but he did that right thing in the wrongest possible way: without Congress, without competent leadership in place to defend the United States against terrorism, and while waging a culture war at home against half the nation. Trump has not put U.S. boots on the ground to fight Iran, but he has put U.S. troops on the ground for an uninvited military occupation of California. Iran started this war. In August 2002, courageous Iranian dissidents revealed to the world an Iranian nuclear enrichment plant in Natanz. Suddenly, all those chanted slogans about destroying Israel moved from the realm of noise and slogans to the realm of intent and plan. Over the next 23 years, Iran invested an enormous amount of wealth and know-how in advancing its project to annihilate the state of Israel. Iran deterred Israel from attacking the nuclear project by deploying missiles and supporting terror groups. After the October 7 terror attacks on Israel, Iran gradually lost its deterrence. Israel defeated Hamas and Hezbollah militarily, and the Iranian-allied regime in Syria collapsed. But Iran did not change its strategy. It was Iran that initiated the direct nation-to-nation air war with Israel. After Israel struck an Iranian compound in Syria in April 2024, Iran fired 300 ballistic missiles into Israel, a warning of what to expect once Iran completed its nuclear program. If the war launched by the rulers of Iran has brought only defeat and humiliation to their country, that does not make those rulers victims of anybody else's aggression. A failed aggressor is still the aggressor. Now Americans face the consequences of Trump's intervention to thwart Iran's aggression. Some of those consequences may be welcome. The attack on Iran is the very first time that President Trump has ever done anything Vladimir Putin did not want him to do. That's one of the reasons I personally doubted he would act strongly against Iran. Maybe Trump can now make a habit of defying Putin—and at last provide the help and support that Ukraine's embattled democracy needs to win its war of self-defense against Russian aggression. The strike on Iran was opposed by the reactionary faction within the Trump administration—and in MAGA media—that backs America's enemies against America's allies. It's very wrong to call this faction 'anti-war.' They want a war against Mexico. They have pushed the United States on the first steps to that war by flying drones over Mexican territory without Mexican permission. This faction is defined not by what it rejects, but by what it admires (Putin's Russia above all) and by who it blames for America's troubles (those it euphemistically condemns as 'globalists'). That reactionary faction lost this round of decision-making. Perhaps now they will lose more rounds. But if some of the domestic consequences of this strike are welcome, others are very dangerous. Presidents have some unilateral war-making power. President Obama did not ask Congress to authorize his air campaign in Libya in 2011. The exact limits of that power are blurry, defined by politics, not law. But Trump's strike on Iran has pushed that line further than it has been pushed since the end of the Vietnam War—and the pushing will become even more radical if Iranian retaliation provokes more U.S. strikes after the first wave. Trump has abused the president's power to impose emergency tariffs, and created a permanent system of revenue-collection without Congress. He asserts that he can ignore rights of due process in immigration cases. He has defied judicial orders to repatriate persons wrongfully sent to a foreign prison paid for by U.S. taxpayer funds. He is ignoring ethics and conflicts of interest laws to enrich himself and his family on a post-Soviet scale—much of that money flowing from undisclosed foreign sources. He has intimidated and punished news organizations for coverage he did not like by abusing regulatory powers over their corporate parents. He has deployed military units to police California over the objections of the elected authorities in that state. This is a president who wants and wields arbitrary power the way no U.S. president has ever done in peacetime. And now it's wartime. Americans have a right and proper instinct to rally around their presidents in time of war. But in the past, that rallying has been met by the equal instincts of presidents to rise above party and faction when the whole nation must be defended. Trump's decision to brief Republican leaders of Congress before the Iran strike, but not their Democratic counterparts, was not merely a petty discourtesy—it confirmed his divisive and authoritarian methods of leadership and warned of worse to come. It is not confidence-inspiring that Pete Hegseth leads the Pentagon. Or that Kash Patel, Dan Bongino, and Kristi Noem are in charge of protecting Americans from Iranian retaliatory terrorism. Or that Tulsi Gabbard is coordinating national intelligence. Or that enemy-of-Ukraine J.D. Vance is poised to inherit all. Trump exercises national power, but he cannot and will not act as a national leader. He sees himself—and has always acted as—the leader of one part of a nation against the rest: the wartime leader of Red America in its culture war against Blue America, as my former Atlantic colleague Ron Brownstein has written. Now this president of half of America has commanded all of America into a global military conflict. With luck, that conflict will be decisive and brief. Let's hope so.
New York Post
an hour ago
- New York Post
How Fox News' Gianno Caldwell sought justice for his murdered brother
The day my little brother was murdered in 2022, he was standing with friends on a street in the Morgan Park community on the South Side of Chicago when a black SUV pulled up and several men got out with various guns and opened fire indiscriminately. For a heartbeat, time seemed to pause, the world holding its breath in confusion. 9 Author Gianno Caldwell (r) with his brother Christian, who was killed by gunfire in Chicago in 2022. Caldwell's new book details the philanthropists and politicians whose failed leadership allowed Christian's murder to happen. Courtesy of Gianno Caldwell Then came the recognition — the burst of defensive moves and noise; the staccato crack-crack-crack, harsh and unnatural against the night. People screamed, the sound primal and raw, as the crowd scattered. Advertisement The SUV now sped away, its engine roaring, leaving behind more cries and glittering fragments of shattered glass. Some 50 shell casings were found on the street, and bullets went through the windows of nearby houses. Three in the crowd were rushed to the hospital; only two survived. Christian had just turned 18 years old. He loved school and sports and was excited about starting college. So much so that he and I had taken the tour at the University of California, Los Angeles, when he was just 16. His future was very bright. 9 Author Caldwell testifying before Congress about Chicago's gun violence epidemic in 2022. C-SPAN Advertisement The police tell me Christian was not the intended target. He just happened to be standing in the wrong place at the wrong time. He was part of a legacy now. Slaughtered. Another innocent victim of America's ongoing violence. And my family was now part of this terrible escalating pattern. 'Heartbroken' isn't enough. My family's hearts were shattered. I was — and remain — devastated and beyond understanding. My grief was quickly accompanied by a burning need to learn more, to uncover why things like Christian's murder happen far too often. To know how our laws, institutions and societal values perpetuate tragedies like his. To ensure that others never experience the same loss my family has and that justice truly serves the people it should protect. 9 Billionaire investor George Soros has donated tens of millions of dollars to ultra-progressive causes — with a special focus on elections for local prosecutors. AP I met with hundreds of other experts on these issues as I wrote the book 'The Day My Brother Was Murdered.' From district attorneys and congressmen to community organizers, gang members and families, like my own, too often left behind in the wake of violence. I've traveled our country, the world even, to uncover the roots of the violence that claimed my brother's life and to explore all avenues for meaningful reform. Advertisement The name George Soros came up often in my conversations. 9 Open Society Foundations, the primary Soros philanthropic vehicle. Soros — who made billions as an investor and financier — is a prominent supporter of progressive causes and the number one political donor in the United States. In total, he has contributed more than $30 billion to liberal causes and candidates. Nearly 10 years ago, Soros first began to channel millions into local district attorney campaigns across the county. These sums far exceeded the total spent on the 2016 presidential campaign by all but a few superdonors. Soros understands that focusing on local politics will eventually bring about the national changes he and his collaborators champion: drug legalization, open borders and mass immigration, the erosion of national sovereignty, the demise of capitalism as we know it and, of course, soft-on-crime policies and bail reform. Advertisement His efforts have negatively impacted my family at a personal level. The former Cook County state's attorney Kim Foxx, for instance, has been funded by Soros — and her far-left, soft-on-crime policies have contributed to the death and violent crime epidemic in Chicago. I hold her and former mayor Lori Lightfoot responsible for my brother's murder. In 2023, I testified before a House Judiciary Committee focused on Chicago's crime problem. Afterwards, Foxx told the press she was sorry for my brother's murder. She should be sorry. Not just about Christian, but the countless others who are being slaughtered. And it's not just Foxx. 9 Caldwell believes that Kim Fox, the Cook County Prosecutor, is directly responsible for his brother's death owing to her departments' lax enforcement efforts. AP It's Larry Krasner in Philadelphia. It was George Gascón in Los Angeles. Chesa Boudin in San Francisco. It was Kim Gardner in St. Louis. It's Alvin Bragg in New York. They are all around the country — and they all have one thing in common: they were all financially supported by George Soros. Interesting how people like Soros, Fox, Lightfoot, Newsom, Pelosi, Biden . . . all have these grandiose ideas on making America 'more just' but do so behind professional security guards and gated communities. Security, in many cases, paid for by taxpayers. Through his primary philanthropy vehicle, Open Society Foundations, Soros has impacted American politics on a national level for years. But the local level is where he has done the most damage. An elected prosecutor is an extremely powerful position in this country. Soros very smartly understood you can spend tens of millions of dollars on a presidential race or millions on a US Senate race. But by spending just a fraction of that on a local prosecutor race, you may be able to effect more of the change you seek. And so he poured resources into local prosecutor races all over the country. 9 Caldwell also believes former Chicago mayor Lori Lightfoot is equally responsible. Getty Images Advertisement We cannot ignore the shadow that crime casts over our everyday lives. It's not just the statistics, the headlines, or the body counts — it's the sheer fact that crime strikes at the very foundation of what it means to live freely. It is about good people, minding their business, walking to work, riding the subway, or going to the store in neighborhoods they've called home for years — only to find themselves at risk of harm. When that happens, when danger creeps into the places we know and love, society itself begins to erode. If we can't keep crime in check, we lose the glue that holds us together — the trust, the freedom and the simple right to feel safe. A single act of crime reverberates, making us question not just our safety, but our place in the world. I moved to Miami in the spring of 2020. Los Angeles, where I had lived since 2017, was looking more and more like my hometown of Chicago. The shootings. Carjackings. Homeless camps. Drug dealers and addicts roaming the streets. The gangs. Leadership in LA was far more interested in whether or not you were wearing a mask or standing on a beach than in its rising rates of property and violent crime. I packed up my things. 9 Miami Mayor Francis X. Suarez, whom Caldwell believes is helping to lead Florida's push toward ensuring rule of law in the state. DAX TAMARGO/Shutterstock Advertisement One of the reasons I chose Florida, and Miami especially, is that the leadership there is doing all the right things when it comes to law and order. 'It's a tale between two types of cities,' says Miami mayor Francis Suarez, who has held the position since 2017. 'Where elected officials believe that the rule of law and public safety are the foundations of a free and prosperous society, versus other types of cities where elected officials fail to uphold the law, refuse to enforce the law, and blame those who follow the law, from police to small businesses, as the causes of crime.' It helps that the mayor can count on support from Florida's governor and state attorney general. Gov. Ron DeSantis cautions that prosecutors in his state don't get to 'pick and choose which law that they enforce. If you disagree with a law, run for the legislature and change it, but you don't get to be a law unto yourself.' Advertisement Crime is at a 50-year low in Florida, with overall crime down by nearly 10% compared to 2021. Murder is down by 14%; burglary is down by 15%. It's one of the few places in the nation that can truly claim meaningful reductions in crime. While Democrats focus their attention on abortion, transgender rights and condemning Israel, the other party works to make sure I can take my family to lunch downtown without fear of being carjacked or shot. 'A permissive society is not a civilized society,' Suarez warns of our other once-great cities. 'It's a decaying one.' People here are less likely to commit a crime in Florida because they know they will get caught. They know the police are everywhere — and the prosecutors will lock them up. 9 Gianno Caldwell and Pres. Trump. Courtesy of Gianno Caldwell Advertisement Suarez provides the simplest path to our salvation. 'If mayors are held responsible for the crime levels in their cities, then we should also hold district attorneys accountable in every local race where it affects their citizens and the quality of life in their cities.' Fund and train our police. Enforce already-existing laws. Secure our southern border and dismantle the gangs. Focus resources, from money to time, on organizations already addressing the root causes of crime. Treat mental health and addiction as the diseases they are, not as a crime after the fact. These are all solutions that have worked in our past. We already know the ways to a safer society. Gianno Caldwell is a political analyst for Fox News channel and the founder of the Caldwell Institute for Public Safety. He is the author of the new book 'The Day My Brother Was Murdered: My Journey Through America's Violent Crime Crisis' (Broadside Books, an imprint of HarperCollins Publishers, copyright 2025 by Gianno Caldwell), from which this essay is adapted.
