Thread: U.S. to investigate Secure Communities deportation program

U.S. to investigate Secure Communities deportation program


By Lee Romney, Los Angeles Times

May 18, 2011, 6:22 p.m.

Homeland Security's inspector general plans a review of the immigration enforcement program that purports to target 'serious convicted felons' but which some accuse of racial profiling.


Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-San Jose), in seeking an investigation of the Secure Communities immigration enforcement program, accused ICE officials of lying to local governments and to members of Congress. (J. Scott Applewhite, ASSOCIATED PRESS / November 15, 2010)


Reporting from San Francisco— The Department of Homeland Security's Office of Inspector General plans an investigation of an immigration enforcement program that purports to target "serious convicted felons" for deportation but has ensnared many illegal immigrants who were arrested but not subsequently convicted of crimes or who committed minor offenses, a letter obtained Wednesday shows.

The letter from acting Inspector General Charles K. Edwards to Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-San Jose), who requested an investigation late last month, said the watchdog agency had already scheduled a review of the program, known as Secure Communities. Homeland Security's Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency launched the program in 2008 with plans for mandatory nationwide participation by 2013.

The review, Edwards wrote, aims to "determine the extent to which ICE uses the program to identify and remove dangerous criminal aliens from the United States."

It will also examine cost, "the accuracy of ICE's data collection," whether the program is being applied equitably across communities, and the way ICE officials portrayed the program to states and counties, which were initially told they could opt out but were later informed that participation has always been mandatory.

Under the program, fingerprints routinely sent by local jails to the FBI for criminal background checks are shared with ICE. Although local law enforcement does not actively participate, the program has turned jails in about 1,200 U.S. counties into immigration screening centers. All 58 California counties are on board, though San Francisco and Santa Clara sought unsuccessfully to opt out.

Proponents, including Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca, say the program is successfully targeting serious threats to public safety. According to ICE, about 28,000, or 35%, of the people deported so far had been convicted of felonies including murder and rape. An unknown number who appear in ICE data on the program as "noncriminals" or as having committed only misdemeanors had prior violent felonies here or in their home countries, or were previously deported and returned illegally, they note.

But opponents contend that by also sweeping up minor offenders or those never convicted of crimes, the program is dissuading illegal immigrants from cooperating with law enforcement.

ICE data show that about half those flagged for deportation since the program began were not convicted after their arrest or were convicted of misdemeanors. Immigrant rights groups also say the program has encouraged racial profiling, an allegation that recently prompted Homeland Security officials to hire an outside statistician to analyze the arrest data.

Secure Communities "has been shrouded in secrecy and we hope that the OIG takes a real and serious look at all aspects of its operation," said Melissa Keaney, an attorney with the National Immigration Law Center.

The organization requested an Office of Inspector General audit of the program last fall and was told one would be conducted.

The program has been particularly controversial over the issue of whether local governments could opt out. Officials initially said it was voluntary but now maintain that it will be operating in all states and counties by 2013 regardless of opposition. In seeking an investigation last month, Lofgren bluntly accused ICE officials of lying to local governments and to members of Congress.

In a response to the congresswoman, ICE Director John Morton pointed the finger in part at private contractor Dan Cadman. Cadman was terminated in March after emails released in response to litigation showed that he told New York officials that opting out was possible and suggested that pressure be applied to Cook County, Ill., officials to bring them on board with the program. His were among hundreds of internal ICE emails released.

ICE, Morton told Lofgren, "takes full responsibility for the confusion and the inconsistent statements the agency has made about participation in the program." Steps taken to address the issue, he added, included "the termination of a contractor who authored several unacceptable emails."

However, the released emails indicate that knowledge of the deceptive messaging went much higher than Cadman, a point the contractor makes in a May 9 letter to Lofgren obtained Wednesday by The Times. In it, Cadman claims he has become a scapegoat for higher-ups who are responsible for the confusion. In his correspondence, Cadman included an April letter to Secure Communities Acting Assistant Director Marc Rapp that supports his assertions.

"ICE painted itself into a corner and needed someone to blame," Cadman wrote. "I think you will agree after reading my letter that confusion over opting out of Secure Communities has arisen not because of me, but because of the government's own vacillation, policy shifts and inconsistent public stances."

In his letter to Rapp, Cadman notes his recommendations in 2009 and early 2010 that ICE be clear with local officials about the lack of an opt-out but says they were rejected by higher-ups. "I faithfully put forward the government's often shifting positions, as best I understood them, even when I did not personally agree with them," he wrote. Reached Wednesday, he declined to comment.

The ICE press office also declined to comment on the Cadman correspondence and said that "as a matter of policy we do not comment on pending IG reviews."

Legislation pending in California would modify the state's agreement with ICE in part to apply the program only to convicted felons. If ICE does not agree to the changes, the legislation would require California to withdraw from the program.

Illinois' governor this month terminated that state's agreement with ICE after unsuccessfully seeking similar modifications. And on Wednesday, program opponents protested in front of the office of New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo urging him to take similar action.

www.latimes.com

I think the mistake associated with the Secure Communities Program is that it tried to distinguish between a really bad illegal alien and just a plain ole bad illegal alien. The program set itself up to fail trying to use the level of criminality as an excuse for de facto amnesty.

It matters not if through the program just plain ole bad illegal aliens are arrested and deported, even if the targets of the program are the really bad illegal aliens. Our country is striving to have only pre-approved good legal aliens here and less even of those, not creating a caste system for illegal aliens that tells them "well if you only break a lot of little laws, you're good to stay here, just don't break one big one or you may be deported", when the fact is they've all broken the biggest law of all that requires deportation, which is being in our country in violation of US immigration law, so any other crimes they commit while they're here whether big or little laws or major or "minor" offenses, superfluous.

They're all criminals. Their first act in this country was illegal. Send them home - as many as possible.

Originally Posted by ReggieMay

They're all criminals. Their first act in this country was illegal. Send them home - as many as possible.

Amen ReggieMay! Their first act is a crime, and everything they do after stepping over the border is yet another crime!

First they step over the border, then they steal an identity, then they use fake documents, then they get on welfare either through deciet or by an anchor baby or two or three or four...

Some just overstay their visas or whatever. Still, it's a crime and the people are criminals.

So for politician illegals being deported for being in the country illegally isn't right and this is the issiue she chooses to take on! However the unemployment rates, the states being broke, the simple fact that AMERICANS are going hungry isn't good enough for her. This is absurd she's going to risk lives so she can get mexican people to vote for her! Sad

Originally Posted by Judy

I think the mistake associated with the Secure Communities Program is that it tried to distinguish between a really bad illegal alien and just a plain ole bad illegal alien. The program set itself up to fail trying to use the level of criminality as an excuse for de facto amnesty.

It matters not if through the program just plain ole bad illegal aliens are arrested and deported, even if the targets of the program are the really bad illegal aliens. Our country is striving to have only pre-approved good legal aliens here and less even of those, not creating a caste system for illegal aliens that tells them "well if you only break a lot of little laws, you're good to stay here, just don't break one big one or you may be deported", when the fact is they've all broken the biggest law of all that requires deportation, which is being in our country in violation of US immigration law, so any other crimes they commit while they're here whether big or little laws or major or "minor" offenses, superfluous.

Ditto Judy. The premise behind Secure Communities was based upon a distinction not made by current immigration law. Being illegal in of itself is a deportable offense and that's what this program should have been based on.

Unfortunately, our own government has now unilaterally determined that simply being in this country illegally is no longer in of itself a deportable offense in many cases. We are now tasked with the burden of creating a subcategory or different degrees of illegalness for those who end up in police custody. That subjective leeway, based upon additional crimes committed is a losing proposition and will never be agreed upon.

So now we have open border politicians who are going to attack Secure Communities based upon a subjective distinction that leaves the entire program vulnerable to scrutiny. We really need to get back to following basic immigration law in this country, which is what Secure Communities should be based upon.

jean,

That picture scared me.

Dixie