Ciattarelli’s first act as governor would endanger immigrants & undermine public safety

In the thick of a heated race for New Jersey’s governor, Republican candidate Giacchino Michael ‘Jack’ Ciattarelli has pledged that his first act in office would be to rescind the state’s Immigrant Trust Directive—a move that would fundamentally alter the relationship between law enforcement and immigrant communities and undermine public safety.

The directive, established in 2018 by the state attorney general, limits the circumstances under which state and local law enforcement can assist federal immigration agents and prohibits officers from questioning individuals about their immigration status unless it is relevant to a criminal investigation.

Ciattarelli, who has received the endorsement of President Donald Trump, has labeled the policy a failure and vowed not only to repeal it but also to prohibit municipalities from declaring themselves sanctuary cities, threatening to withhold state aid from those that do not comply.

“The fact that my campaign received this email is evidence that brave and courageous law enforcement officers throughout New Jersey are angry about being handcuffed by liberal Democrat policies in Trenton, making our communities less safe,” Ciattarelli said, publicizing an internal email he claimed detailed efforts to conceal federal immigration warrants from officers on the street.

The email sent on March 24 to New Jersey State Police staff, revealing that officers were asked not to comply with federal arrest warrants, was made public by Ciattarelli.

Republicans have been using undocumented immigrants as scapegoats to divert attention from other issues and appeal to voters by stoking fears.

Trump’s campaigns have repeatedly used this a tactic to distract from other policy failures, citing isolated, tragic criminal cases to falsely suggest widespread violence.

Republican Representative Victoria Spartz, who immigrated to the United States from Ukraine, faced an uproar from angry constituents at a town hall after she said there is no due process for people deported from this country.

Republican rhetoric has frequently described the southern border as “out of control” and portrayed large numbers of immigrants and refugees as a “critical threat” to the country.

Republican state lawmakers have pushed legislation to restrict property ownership or health benefits for immigrants, using fearful language about fiscal impacts despite evidence to the contrary.

“Despite Republican best efforts to cut funding for the protection of our land, gut social safety net services, and bankrupt our federal infrastructure, now they want us to believe that providing emergency refuge and services to asylum seekers is what’s causing all our economic problems,” said Congresswoman Delia C. Ramirez.

“Immigrants are not the problem! They are the solution. They are an asset to our communities and local economies,” said Ramirez. “There are 11.5 million people ready to help fill the almost 9 million open jobs disrupting the supply chain and increasing inflation. Immigrants are ready to invest in housing markets and grow local economies to the benefit of the 245 million Americans living in counties with shrinking populations. Immigrants are ready to increase our national GDP by up to $1.7 trillion over the next decade.”

Scapegoating undocumented immigrants serves as a key political tool to rally a conservative base concerned about border security and cultural change. By framing immigration as a source of problems, Republicans have successfully driven voter engagement on the issue.

Proponents of the Immigrant Trust Directive argue that its purpose is to foster trust between police and New Jersey’s diverse communities.

Their logic is straightforward: when immigrants, regardless of status, feel safe reporting crimes to the police without fear of deportation, entire communities become safer. Victims are more likely to come forward, and witnesses are more willing to cooperate, making it easier for law enforcement to solve and prevent crimes.

This view is supported by a substantial body of academic research.

A major study from Stanford University analyzing data from 1850 to 2020 found that immigrants are not more likely to commit crimes than individuals born in the United States. In fact, the study concluded that first-generation immigrants have been less likely to be incarcerated than U.S.-born individuals for decades.

“From Henry Cabot Lodge in the late 19th century to Donald Trump, anti-immigration politicians have repeatedly tried to link immigrants to crime, but our research confirms that this is a myth and not based on fact,” said Ran Abramitzky, a Stanford economics professor and one of the study’s authors.

Data from the National Crime Victimization Survey further challenges the notion that immigrants undermine public safety.

Between 2017 and 2023, immigrants were 44% less likely to be victims of violent crime than U.S.-born Americans.

Moreover, violent crimes against immigrants were reported to police 15% more frequently than those against the U.S.-born population.

This suggests that, contrary to the narrative that sanctuary policies shield criminals, such measures may instead encourage cooperation that leads to arrests.

Data indicate that immigrants’ cooperation with police led to roughly 300,000 arrests for violent crimes within six months of the offenses between 2017 and 2023.

The debate over sanctuary policies has become a defining issue in the campaign, reflecting a wider national divide. Immigration has emerged as a top concern for likely Republican voters in New Jersey, second only to taxes, though it ranks lower among Democrats.

Ciattarelli has positioned the repeal as a cornerstone of his law-and-order platform, which also includes promises to toughen bail reform laws and preserve qualified immunity for police officers. “Let me be clear,” he said, “I will repeal the Democrats’ sanctuary state policies on Day One of my administration.”

As the election approaches, the future of the Immigrant Trust Directive hangs in the balance. The decision New Jersey voters make will determine more than just a policy—it will set the tone for how the state balances the complex questions of immigration enforcement, community trust, and public safety. The evidence suggests that dismantling the directive could silence crucial voices, making investigations harder and communities less safe for everyone.