Immigration Activist Jeanette Vizguerra Arrested in Aurora, Sparks Controversy
The arrest of Jeanette Vizguerra, a prominent immigration activist known for seeking sanctuary in a Colorado church for several years to avoid deportation, has ignited a fierce debate over immigration enforcement and political persecution. Vizguerra was taken into custody in Aurora, Colorado, on Monday, prompting strong reactions from various political figures and organizations.
Denver Mayor Mike Johnston condemned the arrest, characterizing it as "Soviet-style political persecution of political dissidents under the guise of immigration enforcement." He emphasized Vizguerra’s lack of a criminal record, her role as a mother of American citizens, and her employment at Target. Johnston argued that her arrest does not enhance community safety and instead fosters a sense of lawlessness.
Vizguerra’s case has a long and complex history with immigration authorities. According to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), she was subject to a deportation order and had previously received multiple stays preventing her removal. While she had a final order of deportation stretching back to the Obama administration, some Democrats claim she has not had due process.
Retired ICE field office director John Fabbricatore stated that he was prohibited from deporting Vizguerra during the Biden administration. He asserted that she should have been deported in 2009 and criticized her as a "criminal" who "hates Trump" and advocates for open borders and the abolition of ICE.
Images posted on Vizguerra’s Facebook account depict protests against ICE and calls to abolish the agency. One particularly controversial image from October 2019 portrays a Native American scalping President Donald Trump, with the caption, "This is how you can make America great again."
Vizguerra’s interactions with immigration authorities date back to 2009, when she was the subject of an ICE detainer in Denver. That same year, she was convicted of second-degree forged instrument possession and sentenced to 23 days in jail. She was also convicted of failure to display proof of insurance and driving without a license, resulting in fines.
In 2011, a federal immigration judge denied Vizguerra’s application for relief from immigration proceedings but granted her a voluntary departure. However, she failed to depart the U.S. within the 60-day window and instead filed an appeal with the Board of Immigration Appeals.
In September 2012, she voluntarily returned to Mexico. She was arrested in 2013 by ICE in El Paso, Texas, and ordered to be deported. She was eventually released because she did not meet the agency’s priorities for removal under the policies in effect at the time.
In 2019, Vizguerra skipped an appointment with an immigration official and sought sanctuary at the First Unitarian Society Church in Denver. She later moved to the First Baptist Church, where she became a leader in the sanctuary movement.
The arrest of Vizguerra has reignited the debate over sanctuary cities and their policies. Mayor Johnston was among four sanctuary mayors recently questioned by Congressional lawmakers about their cities’ policies. Sanctuary cities are jurisdictions that limit their cooperation with federal immigration authorities, often to protect undocumented immigrants from deportation.
The debate surrounding Vizguerra’s case highlights the deep divisions in the United States over immigration policy. Supporters of stricter enforcement argue that she has repeatedly violated immigration laws and should be deported. Advocates for more lenient policies contend that she is a valuable member of the community and should be allowed to remain in the country.
The case also raises questions about the role of political activism in immigration enforcement. Some argue that Vizguerra’s activism has made her a target of immigration authorities, while others maintain that her actions have no bearing on her legal status.
The arrest of Jeanette Vizguerra has had a ripple effect across the immigration landscape, prompting renewed calls for comprehensive immigration reform. Advocates argue that the current system is broken and that a more humane and efficient approach is needed. The outcome of her case remains uncertain, but it is sure to continue to fuel the ongoing debate over immigration in the United States.
The case is expected to draw national attention and further intensify the political polarization surrounding immigration issues. Various advocacy groups and legal organizations are likely to become involved, providing legal support and mobilizing public opinion. The long-term implications of this arrest on immigration policy and enforcement practices remain to be seen, but it is clear that it will be a focal point of discussion in the coming months.
