Thread: CA. Sheriffs’ 287g agreements still in force

Inland sheriffs’ 287g agreements still in force

June 21, 2013 by David Olson
Riverside County Sheriff Stanley Sniff at a June 9 forum in Riverside.

Last week, I wrote about how Riverside County Sheriff Stanley Sniff said his department is considering whether to drop out of a program that trains deputies to screen inmates for immigration status.
The Riverside County Sheriff’s Department is one of 39 law-enforcement agencies that participate in 287g, a federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement program under which local officials ask some inmates about their birthplaces and other information that could indicate whether they are in the country illegally. Those flagged in questioning are then interviewed by ICE agents.
Riverside County’s 287g agreement expires next month.
The 287g agreement that ICE has with the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department expired in November. But the county has continued 287g since then. Sheriff’s department spokeswoman Cindy Bachman said she’s unaware of any discussion on whether to drop out of the program.
The agreements that expired – such as the one with San Bernardino County – were extended until June 30, ICE told me in a statement. Officials with the agency declined to discuss what will happen after June 30.
Opponents of 287g allege that Latinos are singled out for questioning, a charge that Inland law-enforcement officials have denied. Opponents also say minor offenders are flagged and later deported under the program.
Congress cut funding for ICE in fiscal year 2013 from $68 million to $51 million.
On June 5, the Republican-controlled U.S. House of Representatives defeated a Democratic attempt to strip all federal funding from 287g.
Sniff said during a June 9 Riverside forum with immigrants and immigrant-rights advocates that he wants to gather more information before deciding whether to sign another 287g agreement.
The number of 287g agreements has dropped from 62 in October to 39 today.
Previously, some of the 287g agreements were for task forces for street-level enforcement.
ICE announced in December that those agreements would not be renewed because “other enforcement programs, including Secure Communities, are a more efficient use of resources for focusing on priority cases.”
Under Secure Communities, which operates nationwide, the fingerprints of all jail inmates are checked with a federal immigration database.
All of the remaining 287g agreements, including those with Riverside, San Bernardino, Orange and Los Angeles counties, are for jail screening of inmates.
ICE told me in a statement that “ICE expects to continue to utilize 287(g) agreements in the jail environment.”
It has long been a point of contention as to whether local law-enforcement agencies must honor ICE requests to place a hold on inmates suspected of living in the country illegally.
The state legislature last year approved the TRUST Act, which would have prevented police from handing over detainees arrested for non-violent crimes to federal immigration officials for possible deportation. Immigration holds could still have been put on people charged or convicted of serious or violent felonies. Gov. Jerry Brown vetoed the bill, saying it did not cover enough serious crimes.
A new version of the TRUST Act is now moving through the legislature. Staff from the offices of Brown and the sponsor of the TRUST Act, Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, D-San Francisco, have been meeting to try to come to an agreement on language Brown would be willing to support, Ammiano’s spokesman, Carlos Alcalá, told me.
Sniff and other sheriffs insist they are legally required to place the holds and have in the past said they may defy the TRUST Act if it is enacted. Immigrants-rights groups and attorneys — and California Attorney General Kamala Harris – say there’s no legal requirement to honor the requests. ICE declined to directly respond to my question as to whether the agencies must honor all requests.
But ICE Director John Morton said last year that an ordinance in Cook County, Ill., that is more sweeping in its scope than the TRUST Act violates federal law.
In December, Morton released a memorandum that limits the use of detainers for minor offenders. But activists I talked to at the June 9 forum said
minor offenders are still being placed on immigration holds and deported.

http://blog.pe.com/2013/06/21/immigration-inland-sheriffs-287g-agreements-still-in-force/

RELATED http://www.alipac.us/f12/gwinnett-co...rogram-282106/

RELATED http://www.alipac.us/f12/collier-she...-years-282542/