Apparently New York City judges are more concerned with the feelings of tenants than they are with law and order.

Earlier this month, a judge recommended a landlord pay $17,000 in fines.  Why?  Because she threatened to call immigration authorities on an undocumented tenant.

According to a spokesperson for the New York City Commission on Human Rights, it’s the first case of it’s kind related to housing where threatening to call Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to harass or intimidate a tenant has been found to be a violation of law.

Holly Ondaan is the tenant. She was also in America illegally at that time.

In court, she testified that she became “an emotional wreck” when her former landlord, Dianna Lysius, threatened to call ICE.  She claims the landlord also sent demeaning texts because she was unable to pay rent.


She’s in court admitting that she’s here illegally and that she isn’t paying her rent.  But somehow the landlord is the problem?

The city had her back. Their Commission on Human Rights represented Ondaan in this case.  On January 31, 2018, they filed a complaint detailing Lysius’ alleged discrimination against the undocumented tenant.

On September 12th, Judge John B. Spooner recommended Lysius pay a $5,000 civil penalty, $12,000 in damages for emotional distress and complete 50 hours of community service.  That’s according to his written report and recommendation.

Lysius said she plans to appeal.  At the moment, she but doesn’t have legal representation.

Sapna V. Raj is the deputy commissioner for the law enforcement bureau of the city’s Commission on Human Rights.

“It sets important case precedent for the interpretation of our Human Rights Law to include the weaponization of ICE to intimidate or harass someone in housing as a violation,” said Raj.

Raj said the real concern isn’t the law, but rather feelings.

“We will not allow our city’s most vulnerable to be further marginalized out of fear for their safety in their own homes. Immigration status, citizenship, and national origin (perceived or actual) are protected categories under our law, and we will continue to fight to ensure those protections are enforced to the fullest extent.”

Ondaan received her green card on July 30, 2018, after having lived in the Queens apartment – and illegally in America – starting in September 2011.  She moved out September 2018.

She started complaining to police in the fall of 2017 that Lysius was making harassing visits and sending threatening text messages.

That October, she just stopped paying rent because of “financial difficulties”.

She claims that’s when the texts from Lysius increased.

And check this out – it got so bad that Lysius lost the mortgage on the house because of Ondaan’s non-payment. She filed a non-payment action against Ondaan for the late rent, but it was too late.


“It was fun and games when you calling DOB now it’s fun and games calling immigration 12 times day. They can deport you.”


On January 17, 2018, the city’s Commission on Human Rights sent went after Lysius.

They sent her a cease-and-desist letter.  That letter ordered her to stop threatening tenants with reporting them to immigration authorities or engaging in any “actions or practices” that discriminated against tenants based upon their citizenship or immigration status.

In his report, Judge Spooner says he found Ondaan’s testimony credible.  He also claims the landlord “raised various uncorroborated and unlikely accusations against” the tenant.

He said he understands that Lysius’s “dire financial circumstances” – aka having a tenant that wasn’t paying – likely played a part in the text messages but said the threats were still discriminatory.

Now even though he’s recommended the fines, there are still more legal proceedings that must happen before the landlord has to pay up.

Both parties can submit comments before the chair of the city’s commission on human rights issues a final decision and order, according to Raj.  After that, Lysius can then file an appeal.

Did you know that Law Enforcement Today has a private new home for those who support emergency responders and veterans?  It’s called LET Unity, and it’s where we share the untold stories of those patriotic Americans.  Every penny gets reinvested into giving these heroes a voice.  Check it out today.


If you ask some presidential candidates, the solution to all of this is simple – decriminalize sneaking into the U.S.

Earlier this year, presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren introduced her plan to decriminalize immigration, welcome more refugees and focus enforcement on only security threats. Her open borders approach is in stark contrast to the stance taken by the Trump administration.

Warren, a Massachusetts senator, said the Trump administration’s harsh treatment of migrants, to include separating undocumented children and parents at the border, is based on a law known as Section 1325.

It allows for criminal penalties for illegally entering the U.S. or entering legally and overstaying a visa. Warren wants to repeal the provision and indicated that she would use executive power to reduce its enforcement as president. 

“We should repeal this criminal prohibition to prevent future abuse,” Warren wrote in a post, vowing that as president she would “immediately issue guidance to end criminal prosecutions for simple administrative immigration violations” and “refocus our limited resources on actual criminals and real threats.”

So, to translate: Warren wants to allow anyone who wants to walk into this nation to do so with no consequences. She wants to give free reign to anyone and everyone. Given that she is in favor of free healthcare for those not here legally, her plan could get extremely expensive.

This plan came in conjunction with President Trump’s announcement that he will take executive action on the 2020 U.S. Census to include a citizenship question in the population count.

There are also indications that mass arrests of thousands of undocumented people are expected to begin Sunday, assuming sanctuary proponents don’t tip them all off first. Warren, like most of other Democratic hopefuls, refuses to grasp the concept that making an illegal action legal doesn’t make the inherent problems go away. 

Among the other aspects that she cannot grasp, the senator is just one of the crowd when it comes to accusing the current administration of atrocities that were actually perpetrated in the Obama years. Obama’s immigration shortcomings notwithstanding, Warren said she would create a Justice Department task force to investigate what she referred to as criminal abuses of immigrants by Trump administration officials.

An excerpt from Bloomberg News states:

“In his 2016 campaign, Trump mobilized voters with an anti-immigration message focused on building a wall and removing undocumented people, successfully capitalizing on grievances about demographic and cultural changes that have made the U.S. more diverse. Warren’s plan is sure to amplify the president’s claim that Democrats are embracing an “open borders” immigration policy — most of her rivals have not gone as far.”

Warren’s plan is merely political pandering. It is aimed at a growing pro-immigration constituency in the Democratic Party, the Latino community specifically.

“Immigrants have always been a vital source of American strength. They grow our economy and make our communities richer and more diverse. They are our neighbors, our colleagues, and our friends,” Warren wrote. “President Trump sees things differently. He’s advanced a policy of cruelty and division that demonizes immigrants.”

Warren is calling for the outlawing of private detention facilities and limiting detentions to people who pose a security or flight risk, who could be tracked and monitored with technology. She wants to end ‘warrantless’ arrests and instead focus on smuggling, trafficking and spotting counterfeit products.

You have to wonder if she understands that there are a lot of people sneaking into this country via traffickers.   Does she know that some of the people who are coming over illegally are smugglers and traffickers themselves?

Law Enforcement Today recently ran an article about ICE and sanctuary states. Warren, along with AOC and others are all calling for the abolishment of the very groups that were designed to management immigration.

”Sanctuary. Refuge. Harbor. Shelter. Safety. Hiding place. I read that list of words to my wife and asked her to give me one word that came to mind when hearing them. Her response: HOME. It may conjure up other places or thoughts for different people. Typically, they are associated with something good. I never thought I would see the day that those words were associated in such a negative way. The entire left coast has become a sanctuary…for rapists, murderers and other felonious sorts. More specifically, criminals with a history of criminal activity.”

At some point, Warren, and candidates like her will have to wake up and face reality. The reality is that legal immigrants do contribute to society and our way of life in this country. Further reality is that if you simply open the borders with no requirements, you will have many who come here and do not contribute, who simply ride the system. You will also have countless others who come to do us harm. 

How can anyone predict that? It isn’t hard considering we already have those who do that at alarming rates, and we don’t yet have Warren-esque border with no restrictions, no riles and no consequences.

In the meantime, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and other prominent politicians are ramping up their efforts to abolish Immigration and Customs Enforcement altogether.

But now it seems she’s leveled another attack against a major law enforcement agency — the Department of Homeland Security.

Ocasio-Cortez apparently wants to get rid of the entire Department of Homeland Security. (Facebook)


In a radio interview recently, Ocasio-Cortez called the formation of the agency a Bush-era mistake.

David Remnick, the host of the New Yorker Radio show, asked AOC whether or not she’d want to end the Department of Homeland Security.

“ICE is not under the (Department of Justice),” Ocasio-Cortez said. “It’s under the Department of Homeland Security. And so we have now—”

“Would you get rid of the Department of Homeland Security, too?” Remnick asked.

“I think so,” she said.

“I think we need to undo a lot of the egregious… a lot of the egregious mistakes that the Bush administration did. We are, at a very, it’s a very qualified and supported position, at least in terms of evidence, and in terms of being able to make the argument that we never should of created DHS in the early 2000s.”


The Department of Homeland Security employs over 240,000 people that work tirelessly to protect our nation from potential threats. Its stated goal is to prepare for, prevent, and respond to domestic emergencies, particularly acts of terrorism.

Our guess is because DHS absorbed the duties of the Immigration and Naturalization Service when it was formed, suddenly their function is no longer justified in the eyes of those who want open borders.

AOC doubled down on her condemnation of the border crisis, referring to the housing centers as “concentration camps”.

“The fact that concentrations camps are now an institutionalized practice in the Home of the Free is extraordinarily disturbing and we need to do something about it,” she said.


AOC is not the only one calling for these agencies to be abolished.

A number of presidential candidates have expressed their support in repealing agencies that pertain to the issue of immigration. More than a few have even suggested decriminalizing the act of unlawfully crossing the United States border.

Senator Cory Booker was reportedly shown escorting a group of people across the border into the United States this week in front of a massive crowd of reporters.

On Wednesday, presidential hopeful and New Jersey Senator #CoryBooker helped five migrants cross the border illegally from Mexico into the United States. The Democratic Party has made it clear for quite some time that they do not care about securing the border and making sure that immigrants legally enter the country. Because who needs laws when you can have more votes, right? Almost all of the 2020 Democratic candidates support open borders and decriminalizing border crossings, which would be catastrophic for America because it would encourage millions of people showing up at our borders and demanding tax-payer subsidized benefits. Why can’t Democrat’s support the way America has always handled immigration-the legal way? Booker broke the law and could face the possibility of arrest for his brazen act — which was undoubtedly a political stunt aimed at helping his failing campaign.

Posted by Blanka Nieves on Sunday, July 7, 2019

The New Jersey Attorney General threatened action against local sheriff’s departments for working with ICE agents.

What happened to law and order? 


On the flip side, a bill was introduced in the U.S. Senate earlier this year called the “Justice for Victims of Sanctuary Cities Act”.

It would allow victims of violent crime in sanctuary cities to sue the municipalities for putting citizens in harms way.

It specifically states that it aims to:

“hold sanctuary jurisdictions accountable for failing to comply with lawful detainer and release notification requests made by federal authorities and jeopardizing public safety.” 

The bill was introduced by Sen. Thom Tillis.  It’s being co-sponsored by Sens. Lindsey Graham, Chuck Grassley, Joni Ernst, Marsha Blackburn, and Ted Cruz – all Republicans.

“It’s disturbing to see sheriffs across North Carolina establish sanctuary jurisdictions, releasing dangerous individuals back into communities while refusing to notify federal immigration officials,” Tills said.

He went on to point out that our country’s “leaders” need to own the damage they are causing.

“If politicians want to prioritize reckless sanctuary policies over public safety, they should also be willing to provide just compensation for the victims.” 

The term “sanctuary city” refers to a municipality that has clearly indicated it will not cooperate with federal immigration authorities seeking to locate and detain illegal immigrants. 

It’s a movement that’s spreading across dozens of cities, including New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago. 

Republicans have attacked the policy as the border is overrun and border patrol officials are unable to keep up with the wave of those coming in illegally.

The overwhelming majority of Democratic hopefuls in the presidential race aren’t just embracing the idea of “sanctuary cities” – many are moving towards an open border policy in general.

Republicans argue that legal and safe immigration is the way to deter violent criminals from attempting to enter the country, not protecting them from the law. 

“We are a nation of laws,” Grassley said. “Whether you are a citizen, immigrant or even a local government, disregarding those laws should carry consequences.” 

President Trump has consistently criticized sanctuary cities.  He says they encourage illegal immigration, and earlier this year strongly considered flooding those cities with the immigrants not here legally.

He later changed his mind.

“We’ll bring them to sanctuary city areas and let that particular area take care of it, whether it’s a state or whatever it might be,” Trump said. “California certainly is always saying, ‘Oh, we want more people.’ And they want more people in their sanctuary cities. Well, we’ll give them more people. We can give them a lot. We can give them an unlimited supply, and let’s see if they’re so happy.” 

Republicans like Cruz have continued to push for accountability for state and local authorities that work to undermine that goal. 

“Sanctuary cities and their policies are a dangerous affront to the rule of law, and only exasperate the crisis at our border,” Cruz said. “I am proud to join my colleagues in holding these jurisdictions accountable, and will continue working to enforce our federal immigration laws and ensure the safety and security of the American people.”

Want to make sure you never miss a story from Law Enforcement Today?  With so much “stuff” happening in the world on social media, it’s easy for things to get lost.  

Make sure you click “following” and then click “see first” so you don’t miss a thing!  (See image below.)  Thanks for being a part of the LET family!
Facebook Follow First