Trending...
- Governor Ron DeSantis Appoints Three to the Northwest Florida State College District Board of Trustees
- United States Congressional Candidate Peter Coe Verbica Unveils 25-Point Federal Plan to Help Make California Affordable Again
- Florida: Governor Ron DeSantis Announces 300 New Jobs in Wakulla County as a Result of Job Growth Grant Fund Investment
What Is Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick Really Standing For on Border Security and Public Safety?
WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. - Floridant -- In a time when Americans are demanding stronger action on border security and public safety, Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick's recent votes in Congress have raised serious concerns. Her repeated opposition to common-sense legislation—including the Laken Riley Act (H.R. 29), the Border Reinforcement Act (H.R. 30), and the Detain and Deport Illegal Aliens Who Assault Women Act (H.R. 35)—begs the question: What exactly is she trying to accomplish?
Let's be clear about what's at stake. These bills were not fringe proposals. They were targeted, specific measures designed to protect American lives—especially the most vulnerable—from preventable tragedies. The Laken Riley Act, named after a young nursing student tragically killed by an illegal immigrant with a criminal record, aimed to ensure that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detains illegal immigrants charged with violent crimes. Another bill, H.R. 35, sought to mandate the detention and removal of illegal aliens who assault American women.
More on The Floridant
Rep. Cherfilus-McCormick voted against them all.
This wasn't a one-off. Her voting record paints a disturbing picture of someone who appears more committed to ideological purity than to the safety of her own constituents. It's one thing to advocate for immigration reform or compassion at the border. But when that advocacy turns into blanket opposition to laws that would protect American citizens from known, violent offenders, it crosses a line into recklessness.
How can we claim to stand up for women, yet oppose legislation that protects them from known violent individuals who shouldn't be in the country in the first place? How can we look the families of victims like Laken Riley in the eye and say, "We had a chance to do more, but chose not to"?
Rep. Cherfilus-McCormick's votes suggest a troubling priority: protecting political narratives over protecting lives.
We should demand immigration policies that are fair, humane, and effective—but that does not mean ignoring the consequences of open-border extremism. Securing the border and ensuring that known criminals are not allowed to roam free is not xenophobia—it's common sense.
More on The Floridant
To be blunt, the American people are not asking for much. We want our communities to be safe. We want to know that violent criminals—regardless of where they come from—will be held accountable. And we want lawmakers who vote not for party lines or activist applause, but for the people they were elected to serve.
Unfortunately, Rep. Cherfilus-McCormick seems more interested in virtue signaling than in protecting the public.
The question for voters is this: Are we willing to accept this kind of leadership when the consequences are measured in lives lost?
Share your thoughts on my website https://rodjosephforcongress.com
Let's be clear about what's at stake. These bills were not fringe proposals. They were targeted, specific measures designed to protect American lives—especially the most vulnerable—from preventable tragedies. The Laken Riley Act, named after a young nursing student tragically killed by an illegal immigrant with a criminal record, aimed to ensure that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detains illegal immigrants charged with violent crimes. Another bill, H.R. 35, sought to mandate the detention and removal of illegal aliens who assault American women.
More on The Floridant
- AceMQ Unveils Comprehensive Kafka Consulting and Support Services for Real-Time Data Streaming
- 'Sunshine and Storms' giveaway to prepare Southwest Floridians for hurricane season
- Global Court Momentum Builds Against Forced Psychiatry; CCHR Urges U.S. Reform
- Integris Composites Joins Paris Air Show at USA Pavilion
- Cheryl Hines' Trailer PROWLING to Sardinia
Rep. Cherfilus-McCormick voted against them all.
This wasn't a one-off. Her voting record paints a disturbing picture of someone who appears more committed to ideological purity than to the safety of her own constituents. It's one thing to advocate for immigration reform or compassion at the border. But when that advocacy turns into blanket opposition to laws that would protect American citizens from known, violent offenders, it crosses a line into recklessness.
How can we claim to stand up for women, yet oppose legislation that protects them from known violent individuals who shouldn't be in the country in the first place? How can we look the families of victims like Laken Riley in the eye and say, "We had a chance to do more, but chose not to"?
Rep. Cherfilus-McCormick's votes suggest a troubling priority: protecting political narratives over protecting lives.
We should demand immigration policies that are fair, humane, and effective—but that does not mean ignoring the consequences of open-border extremism. Securing the border and ensuring that known criminals are not allowed to roam free is not xenophobia—it's common sense.
More on The Floridant
- Honoring Black History, Culture, and Community in Fall River
- Token-Operated Sake Service Opens at Tobu Nikko Station
- 6-Month Startup Sprint Offers Fast-Track Roadmap to Launch an Online Business in 6 Months
- Real Estate Buyers and Sellers Marry The Home Date The Rate
- The Tipping Point and Adventure at the Edge of Creation Launch
To be blunt, the American people are not asking for much. We want our communities to be safe. We want to know that violent criminals—regardless of where they come from—will be held accountable. And we want lawmakers who vote not for party lines or activist applause, but for the people they were elected to serve.
Unfortunately, Rep. Cherfilus-McCormick seems more interested in virtue signaling than in protecting the public.
The question for voters is this: Are we willing to accept this kind of leadership when the consequences are measured in lives lost?
Share your thoughts on my website https://rodjosephforcongress.com
Source: Rod Joseph for Congress
0 Comments
Latest on The Floridant
- Florida: Governor Ron DeSantis Receives Twelve Bills
- UF Health Shands Becomes First Hospital in the U.S. to Receive Doula Friendly® Designation
- Better Together receives $10,000 donation from Lakeland 100 to support Central Florida families
- Goldstar Rehabilitation Celebrates 15 Years of Early Intervention Across Southeastern PA
- United States Congressional Candidate Peter Coe Verbica Unveils 25-Point Federal Plan to Help Make California Affordable Again
- D8Averse Launches D8Acapture: Disruptive Mobile-First App Transforms Utility Pole Data Collection
- Experience Trembling Firsthand with the New AgeMan® Tremor Simulator
- Mauro Schnaidman named as Managing Director in Miami, Florida
- Flagship Boys & Girls Club location adds outdoor playground
- Continued Streak of Recognitions with Multiple Chambers and Partners Rankings
- Anern Shines at SOLAR AFRICA Kenya with Solar Lithium Battery Storage Technology
- Florida: Governor Ron DeSantis Makes One Judicial Appointment
- Last Call - Submit Your Proposal for the 2025 OpenSSL Conference in Prague
- Florida: Governor Ron DeSantis Signs Four Bills
- Florida: Flags at Half-Staff in Honor of Pulse Remembrance Day
- Robert Michael & Co. Launches New Real Estate Website to Serve Central Florida Homebuyers and Sellers
- IFFA 2025 Shines Bright as Mukesh Modi Welcomes Rio Rocket and Award Winner Lulu Lopez
- Blockticity Launches Avalanche-Powered L1 to Authenticate $1.2B+ in Global Trade
- Price Rite Marketplace Rolling Out Starlite Media's Cutting-Edge Digital Display Technology
- Kemeny, Ramp & Renaud Expands Legal Team with Attorney Baruch Kraut