In the wake of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem’s visit to Springfield, there are recriminations and explanations.
On May 7, Noem visited Springfield and held a news conference near the home where community activist Emma Shafer was slain in July 2023.
Police believe her former boyfriend, Gabriel Calixto-Pichardo, whose mother brought him to the U.S. illegally as a child, committed the homicide. He is wanted on charges of first-degree murder and aggravated domestic battery but remains on the lam.
Noem used Shafer’s death to try and bolster support for President Donald Trump’s deportation policies and to condemn Gov. JB Pritzker. She claimed Illinois law does not allow the state’s police to assist federal authorities in expelling foreign nationals.
“If they are here illegally, (Pritzker’s) going to protect them,” she said.
Noem added that she believes Calixto-Pichardo is hiding in Illinois but offered no evidence to support that notion.
Springfield Police Chief Ken Scarlette told Illinois Times May 13 that Calixto-Pichardo’s whereabouts are unknown. It is widely believed by local authorities that he is somewhere in Mexico.
Shafer’s mother, Cathy Schwartz, posted on Facebook: “We absolutely want justice for what happened to Emma. We have been awaiting justice for nearly two years. We want the person who took her from us held fully responsible.
“It is not justice, however, to use our Emma to blame and demonize millions of people unfairly. It is not justice to show up at Emma’s apartment and drag our pain and heartbreak into the national spotlight, without even asking or warning us. It is not justice to try to scare people into cruelty and hatred towards immigrants. That is not justice. That is ruthless indifference to our pain and exploitation of our deep loss, all for an agenda that she would have opposed.”
At Noem’s news conference she was surrounded by a phalanx of state GOP lawmakers, including state Sen. Steve McClure of Springfield.
In an interview with IT, McClure said he was unaware that the news conference would happen near Shafer’s apartment.
The legislators and reporters were brought by Homeland Security vehicles to the spot near Eighth and Canedy streets. Neither group was told until the news conference began that it was near the site of Shafer’s death.
Although McClure said he went to the site unaware of its significance, he stopped short of condemning Noem for choosing it.
“I was asked to participate in a press conference to talk about the fact that people who were noncitizens and commit crimes in this country and are convicted of those crimes, should not be in our country any longer,” he said. “So, I was there. … that’s the position that I think about 90% of the people of our state support.”
Along with the lawmakers, several “angel families” were present who have lost family members due to crimes committed by undocumented immigrants.
The news conference ended after 20 minutes when protesters arrived at the scene.
Protesters, including Shafer’s mother, had initially gathered across from the Governor’s Mansion, where Noem had been expected to speak. As word spread that Noem was holding her press conference at a different location, some of the protesters left to find her.
Sen. Teri Bryant, R-Murphysboro, said a protester spat at angel families as they walked away.
“One protester blocked the sidewalk and would not permit two angel moms and I to pass,” she told IT via text. “I told the woman who was blocking us and shouting ‘This is my neighborhood and my sidewalk, get out of here,’ that she really needed to move. After I firmly told her twice, an off-duty police officer from southern Illinois told her to move and told us to pass. We moved on and got in our cars.”
Noem said the Illinois Trust Act prohibits local law enforcement from communicating with federal immigration authorities and protects dangerous foreign nationals from apprehension.
“Governors like JB Pritzker don’t care if gangbangers, if murderers, rapists and pedophiles roll free in his state,” she told reporters.
But a January statement made by Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul said that police can assist in cases where an undocumented immigrant is wanted for a crime, although the state leaves the task of immigrant enforcement itself to the federal government.
“Civil immigration enforcement is the responsibility of the federal government. State law does not grant local law enforcement the authority to enforce federal civil immigration laws. This includes participating, supporting or assisting in any capacity with federal immigration enforcement operations unless federal agents have a criminal warrant, or federal law specifically requires it,” Raoul said.
He added the Trust Act does not limit police officers from executing their duties in criminal investigations.
Following Noem’s Springfield visit, which Pritzker called a “publicity stunt,” the governor reiterated that Illinois complies with federal immigration laws.
“Illinois doesn’t need to abuse power or ignore the Constitution to keep our people safe. Like the millions of Americans asking for sensible, humane immigration reform, I encourage the secretary to spend less time performing for Fox News and more time protecting the Homeland,” Pritzker said in a statement.
Sister Beth Murphy of the Dominican Sisters of Springfield said Noem was exploiting Shafer’s memory.
“It was a source of great grief for me, as it was for so many others, that she would do that in a way that was so harmful for Emma’s family and loved ones,” she said.
Murphy cited the words of newly elected Pope Leo XIV in calling for rhetoric in the media to be toned down.
She said of Noem’s remarks: “It’s the truth be damned. … And that’s a big problem. … We can turn it around if we will pay attention to the importance of the words that we say and the words that we write.”
As to Shafer’s legacy, Murphy added, “We lost a bright light here. I can only hope that Emma’s life and her example will continue to inspire other young people in Springfield because we certainly need that. We need that here more than anything.”
This article appears in May 15-21, 2025.
Using tragedies for political gain is wrong. That’s why the woke lunatics never mention Sonya Massey’s name when they talk about how they want to reform policing.
You wrote,
“Using tragedies for political gain is wrong.”
Strong agree—so maybe reflect on the fact that you’ve name-dropped Emma Shafer in multiple comments this week, not to honor her, but to push your immigration agenda.
You wrote,
“That’s why the woke lunatics never mention Sonya Massey…”
False. The call to reform policing has always included victims like Sonya Massey. The difference is, people pushing for reform do it with the families’ support—not in spite of their outrage. Unlike your campaign to twist Emma’s death into a bumper sticker.
You didn’t write,
A word about what justice or reform actually looks like—just more snark from the cheap seats.
But I’m sure you’ll mention “woke” again soon to fill the gap.
Hi BeyondBurgerLogic,
You wrote,
“False. The call to reform policing has always included victims like Sonya Massey. “
Yes, I already know that the left never hesitates to use a tragedy. My entire post was sarcastic.
Since you have such a tiny mind, let me re-write my post without sarcasm so that you can understand it.
One of the left’s mottos is “Rules for thee, not for me”.
The woke left has no standards and morals; they will just take whatever position allows them to wield power against the right. The left may use any tragedy that they want to, and when the right does the exact same thing, they are wicked.
That’s why they get to chant “Say her name! Sonya Massey!”, but the right is forbidden from saying the name Emma Shafer. Because the left has zero standards.
Riots are good when the left is rioting. Riots are bad when the right is rioting. Murder victims may be mentioned when they are tools of the left. Murder victims may not be mentioned when they are tools of the right.
The right doesn’t need permission from Emma Shafer’s mother to say her name.
You wrote:
“The right doesn’t need permission from Emma Shafer’s mother to say her name.”
Technically, no one needs permission. But when a grieving family publicly asks you to stop using their daughter’s name for political gain, and your response is essentially, “Too bad”—that says everything about your motives. It’s not about justice. It’s about owning the narrative.
You wrote:
“That’s why they get to chant ‘Say her name! Sonya Massey!’ but the right is forbidden from saying the name Emma Shafer.”
No one is forbidding anyone from saying Emma’s name. What people are asking is that her name not be hijacked to score points in arguments she never signed up for. There’s a difference between remembrance and weaponization—you just pretend not to see it.
You didn’t write:
A single sentence acknowledging the family’s wishes or the pain they’ve voiced.
That’s not strength. That’s just callousness.
Hi BeyondBurgerLogic,
You wrote,
“No one is forbidding anyone from saying Emma’s name. What people are asking is that her name not be hijacked to score points in arguments she never signed up for.”
Because they have no standards, the woke are often happy to take both sides of an issue depending on what’s more convenient in the moment. But usually they don’t flip sides between consecutive sentences. Bravo!
You wrote,
“There’s a difference between remembrance and weaponization—you just pretend not to see it.”
You mentioned “emotional blackmail” in a previous post, which is one of the most favorite weapons of the left, and this whole scenario is a perfect example of emotional blackmail. Using a grieving mother to stifle political speech that you don’t like.
Unfortunately for you, the right is no longer falling prey to the left’s emotional blackmail. You had a good run from 2008-2016, but it’s over now.
Emma Shafer was brutally murdered by an illegal immigrant who was not only known to the government, but who was previously in federal custody on an immigration charge. The Biden administration could have easily deported Gabriel Calixto, but chose not to. If the Biden administration had done their job on the most basic level, Emma Shafer would still be alive today.
I understand that her mother doesn’t want people bringing that up. That doesn’t change the facts.
I understand that Emma herself was a big proponent of illegal immigration. That doesn’t mean that the government should continue to do the wrong thing because Emma would have wanted them to.
You wrote,
“You didn’t write a single sentence acknowledging the family’s wishes or the pain they’ve voiced. That’s not strength. That’s just callousness.”
If the Trump administration followed in the Biden administration’s footsteps, there would be another 200 Emma Shafers within the next 4 years, and you wouldn’t care one bit. THAT’S callousness. 200 eggs cracked to prepare your open borders omelette.