Kamala Harris

Kamala Harris Misrepresents Her Previous Support for Reporting Undocumented Minors to ICE

Harris said it was an "unintended consequence," but CNN reports it was the explicit purpose of the policy, which she opposed changing.


Brian Cahn/ZUMA Press/Newscom

Presidential candidate Sen. Kamala Harris (D–Calif.) yet again misrepresented her record as a prosecutor in response to questions about her tenure as a district attorney, CNN reports.

As the 2020 presidential campaign shifts into gear, Harris, a former San Francisco District Attorney and California Attorney General, has been trying square her decisions as a prosecutor with her progressive stance on criminal justice in the Senate.

In Iowa on Sunday on the Political Party Live podcast, Harris was asked by host Misty Rebik about her previous support for a San Francisco citywide policy to report undocumented juvenile immigrants who were arrested to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials.

Harris responded:

"That ended up being an unintended consequence of the policy and I did not support that consequence of that policy. And that policy I believe has since changed because it was not the intended purpose of that policy. I'll say this, and I feel very strongly about it, and I always have, which is this, my background is as a prosecutor and I want to know that a person, a victim of a rape or a child molestation, or a vicious violent crime, I want to know that that victim will be able to run in the middle of the street and wave down a police officer and receive protection and security without having to worry about if they do that they will be deported."

But, as CNN details, it was not an unintended consequence. It was the explicit policy of San Francisco to do so. CNN continues:

While Harris was correct that the policy has since been changed, it was the result of a change in administration. When Newsom left his position as mayor in 2011, his successor changed the city's policy so that police would only report unaccompanied juvenile undocumented immigrants who were arrested to ICE; and again in 2013 when San Francisco passed another ordinance which prohibited reporting any arrested person to ICE except in limited circumstances.

There was an active push by the city's Board of Supervisors when Harris and Newsom were in city office to change the policy to prohibit reporting juvenile undocumented immigrants to ICE unless they had been convicted of a felony. But those efforts were opposed by Harris and Newsom, with Harris saying in one speech she said the Board of Supervisors bill violated federal immigration law.

This is yet another instance of Harris massaging her record as a prosecutor. As I wrote in a review, Harris' new memoir emphasizes her record as a "progressive prosecutor" while failing to address or in any meaningful way account for the numerous instances when her office defended dirty prosecutors and opposed efforts to correct wrongful convictions.

My colleague Elizabeth Nolan Brown has also written extensively about Harris' overzealous prosecutions of sex workers and websites that hosted them. Yesterday, Harris appeared to say she is now in favor of decriminalizing sex work. As Brown writes:

If Harris and law enforcement authorities want to target bad actors who exploit these tools to commit harm, they should target the bad actors themselves, not go after online venues that vastly more people use to positive effect. Harris supported FOSTA and targeted Backpage, twice, but was stopped by a judge both times. In the process, she supported actions that disproportionately punish the vast majority of users who fall into the "consenting adult" category Harris claims she doesn't want to target.

Harris is now a strong, vocal supporter of many criminal justice reforms, but she has also strenuously avoided taking responsibility for her previous stances. She continues to insist on having it both ways, to the detriment of her credibility.

See also: ReasonTV's handy dandy video on Harris' record that she hopes you'll forget.

NEXT: Michael Cohen Acknowledges His Own Lies While Calling Out Trump's

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Who knew back then that future Democrat presidential primary voters would go all soft on crime? Who knew that a prosecutor could pad her resume with the wrong kind of easy targets?

    1. Bill Clinton didn’t expect this turn of events when he increased federal support for urban law enforcement agencies back in the 1990’s.

      1. Hillary Clinton certainly didn’t – and it came back around to bite her in the arse.

        1. Google is now paying $17000 to $22000 per month for working online from home. I have joined this job 2 months ago and i have earned $20544 in my first month from this job. I can say my life is changed-completely for the better! Check it out whaat i do…..

          click here ======?? http://www.payshd.com

      2. Hi Everyone ……. …………………………

        I am making 7 to 6 dollar par hour at home on laptop ,, This is make happy But now i am Working 4 hour Dailly and make 40 dollar Easily .. This is enough for me to happy my family..how ?? i am making this so u can do it Easily….

        Click this link

        =====>>>> http://www.Aprocoin.com

  2. Can we try her for perjury?

    1. I bet she has talked to Russians!

  3. Give her a break. She was out there on the front lines, inhaling while Bill Clinton was just faking it, listening to that dangerous brain-cell-killing rap music while y’all was just slamming it.

    Fuck man, ease up. Let ‘er drift. She’s earned that right.

    1. What she’s EARNED is hardtack and a hanging. I’ll settle for metaphorical, though seeing her self-decorating a lamp-post would be justice.

  4. If this is the best they’ve got around here, in six months we’ll be running this planet.

    1. I more and more believe the Pelosis and Feinsteins are letting the kids run off steam and have given up on 2020. They know Trump can’t run in 2024, and figure the GOP has let Trump run so wild that they won’t have any settled successor.

      1. Pelosi cares only about her personal power. Just like Feinstein did.

        AWB and Obamacare hamstrung the party but they were huge wins for Feinstein and Pelosi personally.

        1. Exactly. Pelosi only cares about her own power, and the blunders the Democrat panjandrums bade in 2016 put that in danger. The Rank and File of the Party could quite reasonably say “Well, you sure screwed the pooch that time. Time we got some new Party leadership!”

          So the Party Elite encourage the young activists to run amok, thoroughly discredit themselves, and lose big in 2020. Then the “Older and Wiser Heads” (?) step in and lead the Party to victory in 2024.

          We’ll see.

      1. Those guys from the future.

      2. Charlton Heston and Ray.

  5. Do you guys want Trump again? Because pointing out that the professional political class is no better (and probably worse) than Trump is how you get Trump.

    1. Trump trumps just about every Dem I have seen, but the Dems keep pushing that bar lower and lower.

      1. …so low in fact they (democrats) have to look up to see down now days

    2. I want a Libertarian to win, but I think I could put up with Trump or Booker in the White House.

    3. If the professional class is no better (and probably worse) – then there’s no harm in getting Trump again.

      Its not like he’s done any real damage. Even if he gets that fucking wall fully funded he will do less damage to the country than either of the last two Presidents.

    4. Really? I thought we got Trump because the Democrats nominated the worst candidate since Woodrow Wilson.


      1. Are any of the new Donkeys any better? Less baggage, and a chance to make up their bios, but decidedly worse on many economic issues. None will be the most qualified ever.

        1. Better than Shrillary? I think even Little Miss Green Deal would be an improvement on Her Shrillness. The New Green Deal ain’t gonna fly, no way no how. And I’ve seen no evidence to suggest that AOC intends to ship the United States to an unmarked bank account, one bribe at a time.

          1. AOC probably couldn’t find the United States on a map.

      2. This cycle seems to be their response to that.

        ‘Oh, we pushed the worst candidate since Wilson, huh? Hold my beer . . . ‘

      3. She would be part of that “professional political class” I mentioned, JC.

    5. Since Trump is probably the best president we’ve had in decades, I’m fine with that outcome.

  6. She continues to insist on having it both ways, to the detriment of her credibility.

    Well, she’s got no credibility to start with amongst those of us here and no serious mainstream media is going to bother raising any troublesome questions about her background so I’m going to have to say you’re wrong here.

  7. What’s there to square away? She has consistently been a opportunist doing whatever she thinks would help her rise up. This is consistent behavior.

    1. Yeah, she should just own it. Like Arlen Specter when he switched parties: “I changed parties because I wanted to be reelected.”

  8. “I want to know that that victim will be able to run in the middle of the street and wave down a police officer and receive protection and security without having to worry about if they do that they will be deported.”

    “Of course, if they’re a drug-using citizen then fuck ’em.”

  9. Now TreasonNN wants me to believe what CNN reports? LOL. TreasonNN is trash! FAKE NEWS!



  10. Wow. Democrats must really be losing the black vote.

    Democratic candidates are backing reparations for African Americans

    Over the past few days, several Democratic contenders for the 2020 presidential nomination have come out in favor of reparations for people descended from slaves.

    So maybe Oprah, but not Barack.

    1. That alone would cost them the general election.

    2. How much should Slavs pay to compensate the descendants of slaves?

      1. How much should the descendants of those who liberated the southern slaves have to pay the descendants of southern slaves and slave masters for ending slavery in the South?

        1. Descendants of the white people who opposed slavery from the beginning and then fought one of the bloodiest wars in history to end it.

          Fuck that noise.

    3. Drumpf is a literal white supremacist, so Democrats are in no danger of losing voters of color. They’re supporting reparations because it’s the right thing to do.


      1. C-

      2. Apparently you live in an alternate universe somewhere between CNN and MSNBC

      3. Apparently you live in an alternate universe somewhere between CNN and MSNBC

        1. You must be new here. OBL is a parody.

      4. Good idea.
        I think the slavery party, the democrats and all their supporters, should pay for reparations.
        After all, it was the democratic party that fought tooth and nail to keep slavery an institution in this country.
        Cough it up liberals!

    4. Wow indeed. That’s a desperation move if I ever saw one.

    5. How would any but a tiny, tiny, tiny, minority ever be able to show real proof they were descended from slaves.

      Most people don’t know who their great-grandparents are, let alone those around 160 years ago.

      1. Never saw “Roots” did you?

      2. Well, we surely shouldn’t be kicking down cash to all the LOVELY Somali immigrants flooding into the country now, so SOME kind of proof would be required.

        The whole notion is absurd. ALTHOUGH, I suppose if Europeans were able to demand reparations from the Arab world for enslaving more white Europeans than Europeans ever did blacks it could be okay… Those Arabs do have an awful lot of oil money after all!

    6. Yeah… Look up the numbers. Whites have already paid trillions in reparations to blacks as a result of the massive welfare state which whites mostly pay for, and which other ethnic groups use disproportionately. I guess honest, hard working, employed, upstanding black folks screwed themselves out of their reparations by not being slackers, but such is life!

  11. What’s funny/sad is that Hillary would have a better shot then any Dem currently in the race. Of course we should find out if Beto is running soon. Seems like he would be near the lead as well but he also hasn’t had much scrutiny yet. I’m waiting for the Cinco de Mayo sombrero pics.

  12. One could take a “lowest law enforcement priority” position, but ideally, we should have good laws on the books.

  13. “She continues to insist on having it both ways, to the detriment of her credibility.”

    Since when is that a problem for a left-wing Democrat? From everything I’ve ever seen it’s pretty much a ticket for entry into the club.

  14. It’s great to be a “progressive prosecutor” and ease up on brown people. The problem is that without a corresponding reduction in overall funding for the law enforcement and prison industries, guess who they’ll go after instead? And all indications are that she wants to expand the capacity of these behemoths.

  15. “That ended up being an unintended consequence of the policy and I did not support that consequence of that policy. ”

    Responsibility, Leftist style.

    1. “And I’m offended that you have the nerve to…” points over the media’s shoulder “WHAT THE HELL IS THAT?” disappears around the corner

  16. Once we got to the point where everything was recorded and it became possible to fact check pretty much everything, I naively thought that it would prevent people from lying.

    Turns out people don’t fact check what they believe, and they don’t care what the facts are when someone else checks them.

    1. Part of the problem is that people like Harris are old. They grew up and spent most of their professional life before instant crowd-sourced fact checking and ubiquitous surveillance was a thing. Before they could say something to one group and something completely different to another group confident that nothing was recorded and any discrepancies could be waved off as a ‘misunderstanding’ or ‘you are mistaken about what I said’.

      Hell, I know people my age (late 40’s) who still can’t handle me sending a link to a picture in a Google online photo-album. People *younger* than me.

      So she’s never had to practice keeping her lies straight – the best tactic was just to lie early, lie often, and pound the table when called out.

      That’s not working anymore.

  17. I suspect Kamala Harris is going to be misrepresenting a lot of things over the next 18 mos. It’s done wonders for her so far.

    1. Willie Brown agrees.

  18. I keep seeing Kamala Harris being called out for her drug war support, her support for harsh sentences, her support for reporting unndocumented workers [illegal aliens], and it just makes it sound like she’s better than the Sanders/Warren competition on social justice horseshit.

    If the billing is accurate, she may do better in open state primaries and worse in closed state primaries.

    P.S. Calling out an attorney general for upholding the law on illegal aliens is odd. I understand undermining the rule of law when the rules are unconstitutional, immoral, and/or violate someone’s rights, but apart from that, isn’t “upholding the rule of law” an attorney general’s job description?

    1. Lack of morality is not excused when enforcing the law.

      I accept that you can make a case that enforcing immigration law isn’t immoral by definition – you can’t make that case for the Drug War or harsher sentences.

      1. Yeah, like I said . . .

        “I understand undermining the rule of law when the rules are unconstitutional, immoral, and/or violate someone’s rights . . . “

        Looks like she’s being criticized for enforcing a law that’s constitutional, not immoral, and/or doesn’t violate anyoine’s rights. As the Attorney General of state of California, that’s her job.

        I maintain that democracy has a proper purview and that immigration law is well within it. An attorney general is supposed to enforce laws she disagrees with if they’re withing the proper purview of democracy for sure.

        From a libertarian perspective, I might criticize her for undermining the rule of law by not enforcing immigration law and, hence, the proper place of democracy. Libertopia is a place where the attorney general and the president uphold the rule of law within the proper puriview of democracy regardless of their personal opinions on the matter. There isn’t anything libertarian about a president who thinks he doesn’t need to worry about the democratically enacted representatives of the legislature when it comes to questions of treaty ratification, declaring wars, spending, imposing taxes, or setting the rules of naturalization. Criticizing Harris for doing the right thing here seems to be missing that point.

        1. She’s also being criticized for enforcing immoral laws in the same sentence.

          1. Immoral laws are still laws… Destroying the concept of the rule of law is FAR worse than enforcing any given bad law is.

            1. That’s great. So when gay people have sex when it’s illegal, then imprison them. When blacks drink from the wrong water fountain, take away their freedom. When women try to vote, lock them up for years. You can favor those who enforce and prosecute any, and all, laws, but some of us do not love indiscriminate prosecutors.

  19. Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, go to tech tab for work detail.
    >>>>>>>>>> http://www.GeoSalary.com

  20. Watching her squirm is hilarious.

    Basically, since she’s now on a national stage, she’s trying to walk back all the stuff that she did when she thought she could get away with it away from the public eye in CA.

  21. No big surprise. Pathological liars lie.

  22. Jussie Smollett is Kamala Harris’ nephew.

  23. Anti Whites demand ‘diversity’, open borders, mass immigration ? where White people live Only.

    Why is that? Slavery? Colonialism?

    White people have not done anything non whites haven’t. Not slavery, not colonialism, nothing. Nor have they been exempt from these evils.

    See: Turkey, Mongolia, North Africa, the Slavs…

    It’s clear that ‘anti racist’ is just code for Anti White
    And ‘diversity’ is code for White G-

  24. Funny watching Democrat politicians try to out Lib one another, especially under pressure from even more left wing voters and media suggesting they were too right wing…
    2020 race is a Circus, D&C already sent in the clowns

  25. When on the left….LIE.

    1. Lie back and think of Marx? (Karl, not Groucho)

  26. Miss Otis Regrets.

    Miss Harris Misrepresents.

  27. So… Senator Willie Brown Side-piece was caught in a lie. I thought CNN and WaPo have already anointed her as the heir apparent (pending Moochel Obama’s run).

  28. I enjoyed over read your blog post. This was actually what i was looking for and i am glad to came here!
    shell shockers

  29. It is not so much that the Democratic candidates have changed their positions as it is that the Party has changed dramatically. The Democrats are currently embracing full out socialism. As it always the case, when a person wants to run for office they change their stripes to conform to the position of the mega donors. No matter what you think of Trump, to his credit he did not conform to the party line in order to be elected.

  30. Either Kamala Harris is using Hillary’s tailor (Abdul the Tent Maker), or is wearing her old clothes. Her inability to tell the truth matches Hillary,as well!

  31. The trouble with Kamala is that she has a record as a prosecutor and later Attorney General that belies her present virtue-signaling opportunism. For instance, she tried to keep a man in jail after successive courts (with her repeated appealing of verdicts) found him innocent and the State’s case (led by Kamala) as lacking any merit. Presumably, she did this to increase her record of prosecutorial “success “with an eye to future office. Beyond shameful.

    Then there is her attempt to keep people in jail in order to provide free labor for the state. Again, some social justice warrior! And there are other dubious activities as prosecutor and Attorney General that she would like to cast down the memory hole.

    All Kamal Harris is a bundle of pathological ambition and a smattering of some smarts coupled with a moral compass that always points in the direction of what’s-best-for-Me. Even her mentor (and paramour whom she dropped when she felt she didn’t need him anymore), Willy Smith, was recently less-than-complementary in describing how he got her career as a lawyer going despite a lackluster law school record. I really doubt, once the primaries really get underway (despite CNN’s fawning to the contrary) that she survives the onslaught she’ll deservedly get from the ever-growing list of Dem candidates. No loss, either.

  32. She has been, and always will be a ham handed political hack…She probably hopes she has sucked up some of Willie Brown’s genius while they were together, but it doean’t look that way. she does happen to tick off two of the three big blocks that dems a prove of…woman and minority…it’s just a matter of time that her sexuality will tick the third box…

  33. When Conservatives ‘misrepresent’ themselves they are called liars. Ms. Harris seems to be a habitual misrepresenter or a pathological misrepresenter.

  34. What?
    A politician caught lying?
    Now THAT’S news!

  35. These scumbags will lie, cheat and steal or say anything. It doesn’t matter what truths there are.

  36. If anything half of this stuff makes me like her more… It shows she’s not ACTUALLY as much of a soft headed moron as she’s pretended to be lately!

  37. She is a key part of the current moral hysteria around anything sexual, and of course unfairly targeted Backpage and its owners. She is more like a Puritanical “law and order” Republican than a Progressive Democrat.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.