Thread: CO. GOP questions federal county-jail rules

Concern is over immigration enforcement


DENVER - Some Colorado Republican lawmakers are warning that federal rules for county jails could prevent local authorities from helping crack down on illegal immigration and lead to a "catch and release" practice.U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement stopped housing federal suspects in the Mesa County jail this week, three months after deciding not to send detainees to the Garfield County jail. It said conditions and tactics at the jails didn't meet federal standards.


ICE said Friday it is willing to again send detainees to Garfield County, but Sheriff Lou Vallario said he didn't currently have enough staff to do so and, even if he did, he isn't willing to follow special guidelines for handling federal detainees.

For now, that means Western Colorado has fewer places to detain suspected illegal immigrants, and the nearest approved jails are several hours away, state Rep. Steven King, R-Grand Junction, said Friday.

The Colorado State Patrol says its new illegal-immigration unit has been able to work around the restrictions, but King said that's not a good use of tax dollars. He said ICE should be more cooperative.

"The intent is to enforce both state and federal law as it relates to immigration," King said. "I think that now that system needs some attention by leaders."

King and 20 other Colorado GOP lawmakers wrote President Bush about the issue on Wednesday. Sen. Wayne Allard, R-Colo., has asked ICE to review its cooperation with local authorities.

So far, the only instance of a "catch and release" arrest that the ICE critics cite was in July when the State Patrol's brand new immigration unit detained 18 suspected illegal immigrants near the Utah border.

ICE spokesman Carl Rusnok said the 18 were released because of a lack of jail beds. ICE had stopped using the Garfield County jail earlier that month, but Rusnok would not comment on whether that figured into the decision to release the 18.
The jail is in Glenwood Springs, about 90 miles from the Utah border.

ICE stopped using the jail because its deputies were equipped with stun guns, and ICE policy discourages the use of such weapons.

Rusnok said ICE is now reviewing its stun-gun policy, and because of that, the Garfield jail could house federal immigration suspects again if officials there wanted to.

Vallario said other federal requirements are still too restrictive, such as not allowing detainees to sleep on the floor. He said that's necessary sometimes when the jail is overcrowded and it's not fair to expect legal residents to have to sleep on the floor but not people suspected of being in the country illegally.

"What's going to be next? I have to feed them a different food?" he said.

ICE stopped using the Mesa County jail in Grand Junction this week because federal immigration suspects were housed on cots in a large jail gymnasium jail, rather than segregated by the severity of the charges against them, and because they did not have access to phone calls.

Sheriff Stan Hilkey said that was because the federal suspects were held no more than 72 hours, and many for less than 24 hours, and he did not think segregation or access to a phone were necessary for such a short stay.

Hilkey said jail inmates usually aren't allowed to place calls when they are about to be transported to prevent them from letting anyone outside know about the plans.


http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?news ... 8561&rfi=6

I am beginning to feel an little uneasy about all the state laws, etc. that are being inacted. While they seem good and are good, the enforcing may be the problem.

Is it possible that some, not all - but some, of these politicians who passed these laws realized that local LE either could not or would not enforce the laws? Will they then be able as the federal government has said, 'it's just too big a problem' - and we are right back where we started. ACtually, we are farther behind than before.

Some of these states are supposed to have laws against employers - social services, etc. None of those laws would call for any jail space.

I thought they were only holding people who were criminals - and that those guilty of only being illegal (??), were either held only a few hours or not at all. So if they are holding only criminals, are they saying they can't hold criminals because they don't have enough room? Does that only apply to illegal criminals - or all criminals?

Cut off the freebies, cut off the jobs, and they will go home - many of them. This is a no cost solution to the problem.

Let cities impound the vehicles of illegals - they are driving illegally.