Ariz. law now bars havens for migrants
Website, Pearce say Tucson is 1 such site, but city has no policy
Ariz. law now bars havens for migrants
Tim Steller Arizona Daily Star
August 10, 2010 2:00 pm
Editor's note: This story first appeared Sunday as an exclusive for our print readers.
When a federal judge blocked much of the state's new immigration law July 28, the law's author still celebrated a win.
Sen. Russell Pearce said U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton had left in place a top priority: a ban on "sanctuary city" policies in Arizona. As a result, state law now says cities and counties can't limit "the enforcement of federal immigration laws to less than the full extent permitted by federal law."
"The political handcuffs are coming off law enforcement," Pearce said in a written statement.
But it is arguable whether any Arizona cities were sanctuary cities when the law went into effect.
Asked by e-mail what cities in Arizona are "sanctuaries" for illegal immigrants, Pearce named four - Tucson, Phoenix, Mesa and Chandler - that are listed on a well-known Internet site. But all four cities let their officers call federal officials about suspected illegal immigrants and, therefore, seemingly conform to the new law.
Certainly, none fit the mold of San Francisco, perhaps the best-known sanctuary city. It has a 21-year-old ordinance banning city employees from cooperating with immigration investigations or spending city money on immigration inquiries.
Still, the new law has forced Tucson to change its policy on calling federal agencies to schools and churches. And it has likely prevented any future "sanctuary" policies from being adopted.
For Brian Livingston, executive director of the Arizona Police Association in Phoenix, that's valuable not just symbolically but in practice.
"For us, it was a victory, because now we've placed that tool in the officer's toolbox," he said.
Practice in effect already
Tucson police officers have had that tool for "many, many years," said Assistant Chief Brett Klein.
Indeed, it was put into use Monday in an incident caught on video and posted on the Internet.
That day, Jason Aragón of Pan Left Productions, a Tucson video artists group, recorded Tucson police citing a female driver for running a stop sign on North Fourth Avenue. The officers were suspicious of her immigration status and called the Border Patrol about the woman, 31-year-old Monica Trujillo.
An agent arrived, and she told him that her lawyer was just a couple of minutes away, bringing her valid visa, said Lynda Cruz, who was at the incident and works for Coalición de Derechos Humanos, a Tucson group. But the agent took her away just before the lawyer arrived, and she was held for several hours, Cruz said.
"SB 1070 is in full effect" declared the video.
But long-standing policy gives Tucson officers discretion in checking the immigration status of people whom they suspect are in the country illegally, and in calling federal authorities about them.
Tucson immigrant-rights activist Jennifer Allen opposed the Police Department's pre-1070 policy and scoffed at the idea of Tucson as a sanctuary city.
"It's not a generous policy by any means from our perspective," said Allen of the Border Action Network. "We've tried to change the Police Department's policies, trying to get stronger language separating immigration enforcement from local law enforcement."
Website names cities
The website often cited as an authority on sanctuary cities is run by Steve Salvi and the group he started, Ohio Jobs and Justice Political Action Committee.
There is no legal definition of a sanctuary city, he said. But his website describes it this way: "Generally, sanctuary policies instruct city employees not to notify the federal government of the presence of illegal aliens living in their communities."
Still, his website sometimes goes beyond that definition in listing individual cities. While many look to it as an authority because it is updated frequently and Salvi explains his listings, some people say their cities are unfairly labeled sanctuaries.
Leah Powell, a community resources officer for the city of Chandler, said Salvi put Chandler on his list after a 2006 Congressional Research Service report listed the city as a sanctuary. But he hasn't removed Chandler despite a 2007 amendment to the report, which removed the city.
"I've contacted them numerous times. I've sent them the 2007 report, and I don't get responses back," Powell said.
Salvi put Tucson on his list of sanctuary cities after reading a 2007 Arizona Daily Star story reporting a new Tucson police policy. That rule, stemming from an incident at Catalina Magnet High School, said police may not call federal immigration officers to schools or churches.
Officers were still allowed to call immigration authorities about people arrested at schools and churches, but not to meet them at those locations.
The new law makes such a policy illegal, and it has been eliminated, said Klein of the Tucson police.
de facto sanctuary
Salvi said certain cities' written policies may obscure reality.
"Some cities attempted to evade detection by having de facto policies," he said.
Those might come in the form of unwritten rules that the Border Patrol shouldn't be called, for example, or in establishing burdensome approval processes for calling federal agencies.
That's why the new law will be helpful to some officers, said Livingston, of the Arizona Police Association.
It prevents on-the-ground supervisors or top administrators from interfering with the rank-and-file officers' judgment, he said.
Police administrators, he said, "must bend to the will of the politicians who put them in their positions."
Now, he said, it's up to the officer to decide whether to call immigration officials, and "he can do that without interference."
Contact reporter Tim Steller at 520-807-8427 or at tsteller@azstarnet.com
http://azstarnet.com/news/local/border/ ... 35e1e.html
