September vote passed House with bi-partisan support – but not Vermont congresswoman’s
by Dave Soulia on FYIVT.com
When the U.S. House of Representatives voted last September on H.R. 7909, the “Violence Against Women by Illegal Aliens Act,” a bill designed to prioritize the deportation of non-citizens—including both illegal aliens and lawful immigrants—convicted of violent crimes such as domestic violence and sexual assault, Representative Becca Balint (D-VT) voted no.
Targets violent crime
H.R. 7909 targets only those convicted of the most egregious violent crimes, ensuring their removal from the United States. This bill is not about law-abiding non-citizens or individuals who contribute to their communities; it is about predators—those who commit acts of violence that destroy lives. Specifically, it adds the following to the list of deportable crimes:
“(J) SEX OFFENSES.—Any alien who has been convicted of, who admits having committed, or who admits committing acts which constitute the essential elements of a sex offense (as such term is defined in section 111(5) of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 (34 U.S.C. 20911(5))), or a conspiracy to commit such an offense, is inadmissible.
“(K) DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, STALKING, CHILD ABUSE, OR VIOLATION OF PROTECTION ORDER.—Any alien who has been convicted of, who admits having committed, or who admits committing acts which constitute the essential elements of—
“(i) a crime of domestic violence (as such term is defined in section 237(a)(2)(E));
“(ii) a crime of stalking;
“(iii) a crime of child abuse, child neglect, or child abandonment; or
“(iv) a crime of violating the portion of a protection order (as such term is defined in section 237(a)(2)(E)) that involves protection against credible threats of violence, repeated harassment, or bodily injury to the person or persons for whom the protection order was issued, is inadmissible.”
The bill passed with bipartisan support, as 51 Democrats joined Republicans in voting to protect their constituents. But Becca Balint stood with 158 Democrats who voted “nay.” She has offered no explanation via her X account on social media, where she often explains her positions on policies and votes. (However, Balint did offer this view on Meta-Facebook disbanding its disinformation squad: “The hate, lies, conspiracy theories, and disinformation spread on social media are dangerous. It’s flagrantly irresponsible to put the burden of fact-checking on users. It’s time corporations are held accountable for the rapid fire spread of misinformation on their platforms.”)
Opponents of HR 7909,, such as Representative Pramila Jayapal (D-WA), claimed the bill could have “unintended consequences.” Under HR 7909, the only individuals affected by this legislation are those convicted of violent crimes. This isn’t a hypothetical issue—it’s a real and pressing problem with devastating consequences.
Balint’s Vote by the Numbers
Opponents often lean on two escape hatches to avoid serious conversations: the “small fraction” fallacy and the “non-citizens don’t commit many crimes” myth. Both deserve scrutiny.
First, the small fraction argument. It’s true that non-citizens account for only 5.4% of violent crime arrests. That may sound negligible—until you realize that this “small fraction” translates into some 67,500 violent crimes in a single year. That’s not a statistic; that’s 67,500 lives upended by murder, rape, assault, or other heinous acts.
Each one of those crimes represents a failure of the system to do its most basic job: protect Americans. And for crimes committed by illegal aliens, these tragedies are entirely preventable. If these individuals had been removed from the country as they should have been, those 67,500 crimes would have never occurred.
The fact that the system allowed so many non-citizens convicted of violent crimes to remain in the country exposes a critical flaw in immigration enforcement. Law-abiding citizens have every right to demand better from their leaders, especially when public safety is at stake.
How the Process Works—and Its Failures
When a non-citizen commits a violent crime in the U.S., the criminal justice process often determines whether they are prosecuted, incarcerated, or deported first. Here’s how it typically unfolds:
Criminal Prosecution First: Non-citizens arrested for violent crimes are usually charged and prosecuted under U.S. criminal law. If convicted, they serve their sentences in state or federal prisons. Only after completing their sentences are they transferred to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) for removal proceedings.
Immediate Deportation in Some Cases: In certain situations, non-citizens are deported without serving prison time. This can occur when resources are limited, offenses are deemed less severe, or when local jurisdictions refuse to cooperate with ICE. While deportation ensures the individual is removed from U.S. soil, it often means they avoid serving full justice for their crimes. Worse, the risk of illegal re-entry remains, leaving victims and communities vulnerable.
Failures of Enforcement: Policies in some jurisdictions, like sanctuary cities and states (including Vermont), obstruct cooperation with federal immigration authorities. These policies can result in violent offenders being released back into the community instead of being turned over to ICE for deportation. This failure to act exposes citizens to avoidable harm.
Comparing U.S. Policies to Other Nations
It’s worth noting that many countries take a far stricter approach to immigration enforcement. For example, in nations like Mexico, unauthorized entry is a criminal offense, often resulting in immediate detention or deportation. Border violations in other countries may result in harsher penalties, including imprisonment or even lethal force in extreme cases.
In contrast, the U.S. approach is relatively lenient, especially when it comes to violent offenders. Deportation is often delayed by lengthy legal processes, and some non-citizens remain in the country even after being convicted of serious crimes. This leniency is difficult to reconcile with the government’s primary responsibility to protect its citizens.
By voting against H.R. 7909, Balint effectively placed the hypothetical concerns of non-citizens above the real safety of American citizens. The claim of “unintended consequences” is a weak shield when the reality is clear: this bill applies only to those convicted of violent crimes. The victims of these crimes are not hypothetical—they are real people whose lives have been forever altered.
It’s About Prevention
The most heartbreaking aspect of these 67,500 violent crimes is that they were entirely preventable. Illegal aliens who commit violent crimes shouldn’t be here in the first place. By failing to enforce immigration laws and deport dangerous individuals, our government allows these tragedies to occur. And when legislators like Becca Balint vote against measures like H.R. 7909, they are complicit in perpetuating this failure.
Call to Action
Vermonters deserve to know why their representative chose to prioritize non-citizens convicted of violent crimes over their safety. As part of this article, I reached out to Representative Balint’s office for comment but received no response. If elected officials won’t do their most basic job, it’s up to voters to hold them accountable. Representative Balint’s constituents should demand better.