Plenty of Coloradans no doubt would feel reassured by new data showing a third of the arrests of illegal immigrants by federal authorities are of people with a history of criminal convictions. 

That not only helps vindicate the Trump administration’s much-debated crackdown on illegal immigration but also, more importantly, means that many more convicts have been taken off the streets of Colorado communities. It’s a boon to public safety.

Curiously, though, a University of Colorado-Boulder news release this week touting the research findings, by a CU faculty member, gives the revelations the opposite spin.

“Study: Only 1 in 3 people arrested by ICE have a criminal conviction,” states the headline on the release sent to Colorado news media. 

“Just 34% of people arrested by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents during President Donald Trump’s second term have a criminal conviction, according to new research published July 27 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science,” the press release states, noting, “That percentage is a near-historic low.” 

The study’s lead author, Associate Economics Professor Chloe East, is quoted: “Our results reveal that the reality of immigration enforcement diverges sharply from the public narrative that ICE arrests are necessary to protect public safety by removing people who commit crimes.”

Yet, if 34% of those rounded up do have criminal histories, doesn’t that in fact “protect pubic safety by removing people who commit crimes”? 

And what about those caught in the federal crackdown who have pending criminal actions that haven’t materialized as convictions? Or, those who have rap sheets in their countries of origin? Might the true percentage of lawbreakers be even higher, in other words?

Whatever proportion of illegal immigrants has criminal records and, one hopes, now will be sent back to their home countries — something even more fundamental is at issue here. 

It’s the misbegotten notion that there’s no inherent value to enforcing U.S. immigration laws and securing U.S. borders — that there’s no reason to combat illegal immigration, and it is even wrong to do so. The thinking goes that if detaining illegal immigrants ever has any justification, it can only be if those detained for illegally entering the U.S. have prior convictions in U.S. courts for breaking other laws.

It’s a mindset that extends well beyond the familiar, leftward tilt of academia. It pervades much of Colorado’s political establishment and even some of the state’s news media. It’s the worldview of the sanctuary movement and the operating premise of the activists who, most recently, have been storming the town of Hudson in hopes of derailing a new ICE detention facility there.

They miss the underlying point of enforcing immigration law: to uphold the rule of law in a country that, like any sovereign nation, has the right and duty to control its borders.

Those who enter illegally must be returned to their homelands if caught. And because they enjoy due process while within our borders — often lacking in their home countries — they can challenge their deportation in court but must be kept in a secure place so they don’t flee pending those proceedings. All of which only makes sense so long as the U.S. has borders.

Which is to say that while 34% of those tallied in CU’s study had criminal convictions, 100% are lawbreakers. Even if a lot of Colorado’s chattering class doesn’t seem to get that, it’s a safe bet most rank-and-file Coloradans do.