I got the same response. I think this kid is missing the difference between not disclosing your sources and supporting your argument. this is a situation in which the sources are in no way in need to be protected and insted would probably want their message to be heard.
i'll try to explain to him this distinction in the next letter. I'll mention that i contacted the house judiciary committee and inquire whether Ms Mac Donalds non disclosure stance is her final answer.

dude, this is really great news, i sent her two emails, one through CJ and another through manhattan institute but have not heard back yet. I have spoken to the LA county sherriff's office and they told me that they do not collect the information on the immigration status of the criminals. i hope Mac Donald has something more solid than word of mouth or anecdotal evidence. i am also awaiting a response from several other californian govt. and law enforcement agencies. i'll tell you as soon as i hear ahything of interest.

privet, did you get a response from the city journal? i also contacted a few places about this but no one has responded yet.