RedState⁠91%

Jim Jordan Drops the Hammer on Larry Krasner’s Sanctuary City Stonewalling ⁠46%

By Ben Smith⁠50%

7/16/2026, 7:50:00 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 34 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice, Ad Hominem, and Confirmation Bias, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 22.6% saturation with 178 hits. Analysis detected 1,746 faulty-reasoning hits from 786 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 48.1% and a BS Rank of ⁠46% (11,880 of 21,886 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 54.30% of the article peer group.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (OH-04) subpoenaed Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner on Wednesday after the left-wing, Soros-backed prosecutor failed to turn over records concerning his office’s immigration policies. 
The subpoena orders Krasner to produce the requested documents by July 29. 
Jordan said the committee first sought the records on May 4 and has not received a single responsive document in more than two months. 
The committee is investigating whether Krasner’s office has declined to prosecute or reduced charges and sentencing recommendations for noncitizens to help them avoid deportation or other immigration consequences. 
Jordan’s initial letter sought records dating back to January 2018, including communications with Immigration and Customs Enforcement; policies governing the prosecution and bond treatment of noncitizens; cases reviewed by the office’s Immigration Counsel; and communications with the Philadelphia Police Department and the Sheriff’s Office. 
Read More: Jim Jordan Zeroes in on Philly's Woke DA Krasner, Accuses Him of Bending Justice for Illegal Aliens 
Soros-Backed Philly DA Larry Krasner's Death Penalty Problem Just Blew Up Again 
The May letter cited a district attorney’s office policy encouraging prosecutors to consider “alternative plea offers or sentencing recommendations” when a conviction could carry immigration consequences. 
It also pointed to language from Krasner’s office stating that “low-level and nonviolent crimes should not lead to deportation or necessarily risk one’s immigration status.” 
Krasner was originally given until May 18 to produce the records. 
According to Jordan’s subpoena letter, Krasner responded that the committee’s request appeared “baseless” and lacked an accurate legal or factual foundation. 
Krasner also said his office was working to retain counsel and that a lawyer would respond. 
Jordan said that response never came. 
Instead, on July 7, Krasner sent another letter, one that made ad hominem attacks on committee members and attempted to impose conditions on his cooperation. 
Jordan wrote: 
“More than two months have passed since the Committee requested material from you and you have failed to produce even a single responsive document. 
Accordingly, the Committee is issuing compulsory process to obtain the relevant materials.” 
The committee announced the subpoena Wednesday evening, accusing Krasner of ignoring its requests for months and using prosecutorial discretion to protect illegal aliens from immigration consequences. 
NEW: Chairman @jim_jordan subpoenaed Philadelphia DA Larry Krasner for information on his sanctuary policies after Krasner ignored the Committee's requests for months. 
Sanctuary jurisdictions like Philadelphia flout immigration law and make our streets less safe. 
If an pic.twitter.com/z2vHMnQf45 
— House Judiciary GOP 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸 (@JudiciaryGOP) July 16, 2026 
Krasner has argued that decisions involving charging, pleas, and sentencing belong to state and local officials rather than Congress. 
In a previous response to Jordan and Rep. 
Tom McClintock (CA-05), he attacked both lawmakers for what he called "legal errors" and accused them of adhering to "election denialism" and "climate change denialism," while noting, pointedly, that neither had passed the bar. 
Jordan rejected Krasner’s jurisdictional argument, citing the House Judiciary Committee’s authority over immigration policy, criminal law enforcement, and judicial proceedings. 
The subpoena letter also cited Supreme Court decisions recognizing Congress’s broad investigative authority when lawmakers are considering potential legislation. 
Jordan said local prosecution policies become a federal concern when they are designed to interfere with immigration enforcement. 
The committee wrote: 
“Failing to prosecute or under-prosecuting foreign nationals so that immigration consequences can be avoided implicates Congress’s plenary power over immigration.” 
Jordan also raised the possibility that preferential treatment based on citizenship or immigration status could violate federal civil rights laws. 
The letter cited a Justice Department investigation into similar charging and plea-bargaining policies in Fairfax County, Virginia. 
Krasner responded Wednesday by calling the subpoena "yet another step in authoritarian efforts to do dirt in the dark" and to pressure state prosecutors. 
"We have always complied with the law and will continue to do that. 
That makes us different from Trump, who spends all day, every day, violating the law of the U.S. 
Constitution ― and morality." 
The dispute comes as Philadelphia officials have expanded efforts to restrict cooperation with federal immigration authorities. 
City lawmakers approved a package of “ICE Out” measures in April, although a federal judge later blocked the city from preventing ICE agents from concealing their identities during enforcement operations. 
Jordan said the requested records could inform legislation targeting sanctuary jurisdictions. 
The committee previously advanced the Shut Down Sanctuary Policies Act of 2026 and is considering changes to immigration law that would allow federal officials to consider admissions of guilt, rather than convictions alone, when determining deportability and eligibility for immigration benefits. 
Krasner now has until July 29 to produce the documents the committee first requested in May. 
Whether he complies, or continues to stonewall, will determine whether the standoff escalates further. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 13.4%Ben Smith: 2.8%RedState: 7.0%Confirmation Bias13.4%This article: 1.5%Ben Smith: 2.4%RedState: 0.8%Anchoring Bias1.5%This article: 1.7%Ben Smith: 2.8%RedState: 3.4%Availability Heuristic1.7%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 0.7%RedState: 1.0%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 0.5%RedState: 0.9%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 2.1%RedState: 1.9%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 10.6%Ben Smith: 11.1%RedState: 9.2%Framing Effect10.6%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 1.5%RedState: 0.5%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 0.4%RedState: 0.4%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 5.2%Ben Smith: 0.3%RedState: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect5.2%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 0.8%RedState: 1.7%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 2.5%Ben Smith: 1.0%RedState: 1.7%Pessimism Bias2.5%This article: 22.6%Ben Smith: 8.8%RedState: 13.9%Negativity Bias22.6%This article: 3.9%Ben Smith: 2.6%RedState: 1.8%Self-Serving Bias3.9%This article: 6.9%Ben Smith: 1.4%RedState: 2.0%Fundamental Attribution Error6.9%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 0.2%RedState: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 3.1%Ben Smith: 1.8%RedState: 4.7%In-Group Bias3.1%This article: 7.5%Ben Smith: 1.0%RedState: 3.0%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias7.5%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 1.0%RedState: 2.0%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 0.2%RedState: 0.8%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 0.0%RedState: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 5.6%Ben Smith: 1.1%RedState: 1.2%Recency Bias5.6%This article: 1.5%Ben Smith: 0.2%RedState: 0.5%Primacy Effect1.5%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 0.0%RedState: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 19.7%Ben Smith: 4.2%RedState: 6.9%Ad Hominem19.7%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 1.1%RedState: 2.6%Straw Man0.0%This article: 7.1%Ben Smith: 2.7%RedState: 3.3%Appeal to Authority7.1%This article: 1.8%Ben Smith: 1.6%RedState: 2.4%False Dilemma1.8%This article: 1.8%Ben Smith: 0.5%RedState: 1.4%Slippery Slope1.8%This article: 1.5%Ben Smith: 0.1%RedState: 0.2%Circular Reasoning1.5%This article: 7.8%Ben Smith: 5.1%RedState: 10.1%Hasty Generalization7.8%This article: 1.4%Ben Smith: 0.9%RedState: 0.7%Red Herring1.4%This article: 2.8%Ben Smith: 0.4%RedState: 0.9%Bandwagon2.8%This article: 10.9%Ben Smith: 4.7%RedState: 8.5%Appeal to Emotion10.9%This article: 10.4%Ben Smith: 1.1%RedState: 1.8%Begging the Question10.4%This article: 5.3%Ben Smith: 2.6%RedState: 2.5%Post Hoc (False Cause)5.3%This article: 2.3%Ben Smith: 0.5%RedState: 0.9%Tu Quoque2.3%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 0.5%RedState: 1.2%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 0.0%RedState: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 0.3%RedState: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 2.5%Ben Smith: 1.5%RedState: 2.6%Anecdotal2.5%This article: 1.7%Ben Smith: 0.1%RedState: 0.3%No True Scotsman1.7%This article: 5.5%Ben Smith: 1.5%RedState: 1.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation)5.5%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 0.0%RedState: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 0.0%RedState: 0.0%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 0.1%RedState: 0.2%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 0.0%RedState: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 0.1%RedState: 0.3%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 7.5%Ben Smith: 1.7%RedState: 2.4%Unattributed Quote7.5%This article: 7.3%Ben Smith: 1.1%RedState: 1.8%Quote-first Misdirection7.3%This article: 20.5%Ben Smith: 10.1%RedState: 21.5%Biased Writer Voice20.5%This article: 4.7%Ben Smith: 2.8%RedState: 4.8%Indoctrination4.7%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 0.4%RedState: 0.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 11.2%Ben Smith: 9.1%RedState: 15.4%Politically Right Leaning Bias11.2%This article: 2.4%Ben Smith: 2.6%RedState: 3.6%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…2.4%

786 words analyzed.

Speakers

4speakers66%attributed speech271writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageJim Jordan • 24 words • 0.0% coverageHouse Judiciary Committee • 28 words • 0.0% coverageJim Jordan • 44 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageJim Jordan • 21 words • 0.0% coverageLarry Krasner • 16 words • 0.0% coverageJim Jordan • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 100.0% coverageJim Jordan • 2 words • 0.0% coverageJim Jordan • 24 words • 0.0% coverageJim Jordan • 12 words • 0.0% coverageHouse Judiciary Committee • 26 words • 100.0% coverageHouse Judiciary GOP • 22 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageHouse Judiciary GOP • 9 words • 0.0% coverageLarry Krasner • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageLarry Krasner • 34 words • 100.0% coverageJim Jordan • 20 words • 0.0% coverageHouse Judiciary Committee • 19 words • 0.0% coverageJim Jordan • 18 words • 0.0% coverageHouse Judiciary Committee • 3 words • 0.0% coverageHouse Judiciary Committee • 20 words • 0.0% coverageJim Jordan • 20 words • 0.0% coverageHouse Judiciary Committee • 17 words • 0.0% coverageLarry Krasner • 24 words • 100.0% coverageLarry Krasner • 13 words • 0.0% coverageLarry Krasner • 18 words • 0.0% coverageLarry Krasner • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageJim Jordan • 11 words • 0.0% coverageHouse Judiciary Committee • 41 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

House Judiciary GOP

71%flagged-word coverage
31 attributed words6.0% of attributed speech61% writer coverage
0%37.5%75.0%Quote-first Misdirection+66.9 ptsWriter: 4.1%House Judiciary GOP: 71.0%71.0%Politically Right Leaning +46.6 ptsWriter: 24.4%House Judiciary GOP: 71.0%71.0%Biased Writer Voice-41.0 ptsWriter: 41.0%House Judiciary GOP: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote-9.2 ptsWriter: 9.2%House Judiciary GOP: 0.0%0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -7.0 ptsWriter: 7.0%House Judiciary GOP: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-4.8 ptsWriter: 4.8%House Judiciary GOP: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.