Thread: Enforcing immigration law S.D.U.T.

Enforcing immigration law

Local agencies wrong to complain about U.S. program

2:00 a.m. October 19, 2009

For state and local police agencies that serve areas with large Latino immigrant populations, one of the most important decisions is whether to let their officers dabble in immigration enforcement.

For the vast majority of such agencies, including the San Diego Police Department, the choice is easy. Not a chance, they say. Dozens of police chiefs and sheriffs have come out against such a policy, expressing their concern that turning their personnel into surrogates for immigration authorities is a sure-fire way to undermine the trust they've built up with immigrant communities and the willingness of immigrants to report crime and serve as witnesses.

Others are more eager to try their hand at enforcing immigration laws in cooperation with the federal government. More than 60 state and local enforcement agencies have flocked to the 287(g) program, in which agencies sign a voluntary agreement with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Officers are trained to check legal status of prisoners and crime suspects and to initiate deportations. The contract specifies whether the agencies are authorized to check for legal status in jails, on the street or both.

If you participate, you have to follow certain rules laid down by Washington. Now some of the agencies are balking.

According to a recent article in USA Today, some of the law enforcement agencies that participate in 287(g) are complaining about federal requirements, either because they think they're not being afforded enough freedom to go about the task as they see fit, or because — at the other extreme — they fear that the administration wants them to take a more active role in this line of work than they feel comfortable taking. Others are concerned about the investment of time and money at a time when budgets for local police and sheriff departments are running low on funds.

The administration seems to be listening and making the necessary adjustments. In some cases, most notably that of Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio in Arizona, ICE has decided to limit the immigration enforcement authority to checking legal status of suspects booked into the jail and not individuals simply roaming the streets. Arpaio's department is under investigation by the Justice Department for alleged racial profiling.

The 287(g) is inherently problematic. As much as possible, immigration enforcement should be left to federal authorities. However, it is the law. If state and local agencies want to participate, that is their prerogative. But the agencies have to follow the rules. They don't get to run roughshod over the federal government, and treat this power as just another weapon in their crime-fighting arsenal. If they have a problem with that, then they don't belong in the program. And maybe they should leave immigration enforcement to the professionals.

http://www3.signonsandiego.com/stories/ ... ?uniontrib

...expressing their concern that turning their personnel into surrogates for immigration authorities is a sure-fire way to undermine the trust they've built up with immigrant communities and the willingness of immigrants to report crime and serve as witnesses.

If they were LEGAL immigrants, there is no need to fear contacting law enforcement.
And since when did any law enforcement agency have the right to pick and choose which laws they want to enforce?