"Inslee signs sanctuary state law" (Skagit Valley Herald, May 23) in open defiance of federal immigration laws and enforcement, joining a minority of other misguided Democrat-led states. Why? The answer is pure liberal Democrat politics in a not-so-veiled effort to garner more supporters.

The net effect is de facto amnesty, granting people here illegally the right to remain in the country — and certainly this state — unchallenged, arguably at huge taxpayer cost.

Leading the pack is California, where entrenched Democrat politicians champion giving noncitizens the right to vote. San Francisco already allows it. This is pure pandering at its finest.

The "sanctuary" process is aided and abetted by overtly sympathetic — or possibly just ignorant and unwitting — media writers (notably The Associated Press) whose style consistently fails to differentiate between legal immigrants and those here illegally, referring to both categories as simply "immigrants." This is blatant misrepresentation, misleading and shameful.

The entire Democrat sanctuary philosophy begs the question: What kind of country cannot control its borders? The southern border is breached daily in unprecedented numbers by organized "invaders," and countless others overstay government-granted visas without any follow-up or consequence.

People here illegally number in the millions, and the actual number, sadly, is unknown. Why bother with a military defense policy for national security when the country can be taken over from within without firing a single hostile shot? Is this what Democrats mean by "transforming America?"

Bruce Elliot

La Conner

Load comments