Earlier this summer, the Post asked our readers what issues you wanted to hear candidates in contested races address leading up to the Aug. 4 primary election.
Based on that feedback, we developed a five-item questionnaire centering the issues most important to residents across Johnson County.
Each day this week, we’ll publish the candidates’ responses to one question. So far, we’ve published responses on property taxes and state tax policy, public schools, special education and vouchers, housing affordability and data centers.
Today, we’re publishing candidates’ responses to the following question:
Immigration was the most-raised topic from readers this cycle, and they’re divided. Some asked whether candidates will “work with ICE” and back stronger enforcement. Others asked what lawmakers will do to “protect our immigrant neighbors from unlawful detainment.” The Legislature this year passed a law over the governor’s veto, allowing sheriffs to enter agreements with ICE without county commission approval. The same law created a 25-foot buffer around first responders, including ICE agents, that press and civil-liberties groups argue chills protest and reporting. Do you support such measures? More broadly, what role should the state play in federal immigration enforcement?
Below are the answers the Post received from candidates on the issue:
District 5 — Republican
Jon Chitwood
Immigration is a federal issue, and the federal government needs to do its job. Kansas should not be expected to solve a broken federal immigration system.
The state’s role should be focused on public safety, the rule of law, and making sure any cooperation with federal authorities is lawful. We can support law enforcement without turning every local issue into a federal immigration fight.
Kansas should respect constitutional rights, due process, and the dignity of families living in our communities. At the same time, we should expect the federal government to secure the border, enforce immigration law, and fix the system it is responsible for.
Courtney L. Crawford
Did not provide the Post with a response.
Courtney Sappington (incumbent)
Did not provide the Post with a response.
District 26 — Democratic
Laura Johnson
Did not provide the Post with a response.
Robert Collins
Did not provide the Post with a response.
District 27 — Democratic
Sara Kiewiet
Immigration is primarily a federal responsibility, and I believe the state’s role should be focused on supporting public safety while respecting the Constitution and the rule of law. I support cooperation between state and federal law enforcement when it involves individuals who have committed serious crimes and when that cooperation is carried out within constitutional limits.
At the same time, every person in the United States is entitled to the protections of the Constitution, including the Fifth Amendment right to due process. Regardless of immigration status, all people should be treated with fairness, dignity, and respect. Public safety and constitutional rights are not competing values – they should go hand in hand.
I am cautious about state policies that unnecessarily expand the state’s role in federal immigration enforcement or could undermine trust between local law enforcement and the communities they serve. Local officers are most effective when victims and witnesses feel safe reporting crimes and cooperating with investigations.
Kansas lawmakers should focus on ensuring that any immigration-related policies protect public safety, respect constitutional rights, and provide clear accountability and transparency. We can support law enforcement while also upholding due process and the fundamental principles of fairness that define our legal system.
C. Edward Young
My perspective on ICE and its predecessor INS is unique. As an attorney, I have worked with counties with friendly relationships with ICE. Counties benefit from ICE holds or detainers with a higher than standard housing rate. Unfortunately, as everyone witnessed over the last year, ICE tends to see results as big picture numbers rather than with individual rights in mind. A paperwork snafu for ICE resulting in an unlawful imprisonment claim and judgment is a margin of error mistake for a federal agency defended by a US Attorney. For a rural county that snafu could equate to the annual salary for a deputy or two, even if the case is ultimately dismissed. The county commission should be permitted to weigh the pros and cons of working with ICE. If the sheriff costs the county money, that money should come from the sheriff. The lack of focus on individual rights by ICE is a systemic issue. The demand to abolish ICE is a response to the agency’s highly publicized tactics. ICE could serve a meaningful purpose, targeting the worst of the worst. However, that goal must be balanced against individual rights that have been earned by blood and service.
As a professional standards (internal affairs) officer in a small department, I watched hundreds of hours of videos involving first responder interactions with the public. I’ve benefitted from the public helping me when help was miles away. I was a member of the public helping a police officer when he was inexplicably attacked by a pedestrian victim of a vehicle accident. Should there be a halo around first responders separating them from the public? No. Is it possible that a protester obstructs justice? Yes. The goal of a halo law sounds noble, but it does not encourage deescalation.
District 30 — Democratic
Tyler Holmes
Outside of deporting violent criminals, Kansas should not cooperate with federal immigration enforcement as currently constituted. I hope for common sense reforms to immigration and immigration enforcement, but at present ICE and other agencies are acting with cruelty and impunity. The legislature should focus on measures to improve public health and safety, not support efforts which cause unnecessary harm to people and shield government agents from accountability.
Amelia Wiederaenders
I would work to repeal the law giving law enforcement the 25ft cushion because I believe they should be accountable to their communities.
I don’t believe the state should be involved in federal immigration enforcement because I think it is unethical to terrorize people who might be in this country because they needed to escape their own country and couldn’t do that legally. In my view communities are being torn apart by these deportations and I would stand in the way of anything that would work to further tear our communities apart.
Zachary Thomas Hawkins
I think it is the state’s role to protect the rights of all its residents. Due process applies to everyone, citizen or not. We have repeatedly seen due process violations from the administration, and I find it irresponsible for the State of Kansas to cooperate with such behavior. As your representative would protect due process first and foremost.
I don’t support the HALO bill and would work to repeal it as a legislator. Legal scholars and the ACLU alike have spoken to its first amendment concerns, and I agree that it is blatantly unconstitutional. It’s incalculable how many taxpayer dollars will be wasted as it works its way through the courts.
Additionally, I disagree with the bill passed allowing sheriffs to enter agreements with ICE without county commission approval. It’s important that the city has a say as well. Multiple Americans have been killed as a result of illegal ICE raids and traffic stops. I do not support the current role and tactics of ICE, and they have no place being here in Kansas. I would not support their involvement in Kansas as a legislator.
District 78 — Democratic
KaMesha Bernard
Did not provide the Post with a response.
Tim Lundberg
Did not provide the Post with a response.
District 121 — Republican
Thomas Palenske
I served more than 30 years in the US military protecting our constitutional rights to freedom of speech, press, and protesting. I certainly support our constitutional rights and protecting them; but it needs to be done safely and our men and women out there protecting our communities every day should not face unnecessary risk doing their job in the homeland. The 25-foot buffer likely provides that space each side should have to do their job and to express their views. As a leader in the military for decades — I have seen first hand why people want to come to the United States — and I support immigration. There are legal pathways to migrate to the U.S., lots of them, that don’t exasperate or abuse the systems we have in place to support people in pursuing the American way of life. ICE needs support to ensure accountability to those systems and I believe our state should support them in doing their job to ensure that migrants are following the law and utilizing those legal pathways to be in the US.
Mike Storm (incumbent)
The federal government has the primary responsibility for securing our borders and enforcing our nation’s immigration laws, but Kansas has an important role to play in protecting public safety and supporting federal law enforcement.
I supported allowing local law enforcement to work with federal partners because cooperation between agencies helps remove dangerous criminals from our communities. I also voted for the safety buffer around first responders, because everyone deserves to be able to do their job safely. That law is about protecting public safety.
I also voted to ensure public benefits are reserved for individuals who are lawfully present in the United States. Kansans expect taxpayer dollars to be used responsibly and in accordance with the law.
We should support legal immigration, uphold the rule of law, and make sure Kansas remains a safe place to live, work, and raise a family.
