| BARRIOZONA |
Permission to reprint or copy this article or photo, other than personal use, must be obtained from BARRIOZONA,
Call 480-983-1445 or e-mail admin@barriozona.com with your request
Call 480-983-1445 or e-mail admin@barriozona.com with your request
Local Police and Federal Immigration Enforcement
The Appleseed Network Report Local Police and Federal Immigration Enforcement
Executive Summary
May 24, 2008
May 24, 2008
The Nebraska-based non-profit, non-partisan law project Appleseed Network released a report titled "Forcing Our Blues
Into Gray Areas, Local Police and Federal Immigration Enforcement", analyzing whether local law enforcement should be
enforcing federal immigration law. Appleseed's report outlines the legal history behind the enforcement of federal
immigration laws by local agencies, and points out the reasons why an increase in this type of collaboration is a "bad
public policy" decision. Many police departments, local governments, and organizations around the country are opposing
increased local police involvement in federal immigration laws, but cities like Phoenix, Arizona and its Police Department
have expanded their role to report undocumented individuals to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
Excerpt
Local Police Enforcement of Immigration Laws Jeopardizes Public Safety
Why local police should not stop, question, arrest, or detain individuals suspected of violating federal immigration laws is
not always immediately apparent to the public. It can be initially attractive to believe that involving local police in
immigration enforcement could reduce the likelihood of a terrorist attack or provide an important public service by
assisting understaffed federal agents. The negative effects on public safety affect all members of a community, not just
the immigrant population.
1. Adding Immigration Enforcement to the Duties of Local Law Enforcement Is a Strain on Already Limited Resources
Local and state law enforcement agencies frequently do not have sufficient resources to effectively carry out the primary
tasks of criminal and civil law enforcement. Many local police departments and sheriffs oppose immigration enforcement
initiatives. Some have publicly stated that they will not proactively enforce immigration laws, or that they oppose coercive
efforts such as the Border Protection Act that would require them to undertake immigration enforcement. One reason local
police departments oppose immigration enforcement initiatives is that they burden departments that are already under-
resourced and under-staffed. It is important to note that federal funding for 287(g) agreements covers very few costs and
that the funding
is uncertain.
2. Federal Immigration Law Is Complex and Technical
Local police lack expertise in federal immigration law, which is notoriously complex, extremely technical, and frequently
subject to change. Immigration laws have been compared to the tax code in their complexity, and a wide range of factors
and documents contribute to the determination of a person’s immigration status. Asking the police to assess individuals’
immigration status is like asking them to stay abreast of tax law and calculate individuals’ refunds as they enforce other
laws.
3. Immigration Enforcement by Police Undermines Their Efforts to Build Trust with Immigrant Communities and May
Impede Anti-Terrorism Efforts
The most alarming aspect of police enforcement of immigration law is that it undermines the many community policing
initiatives that have developed over the past decade, which are a significant factor in the declining crime rate during that
same time. Many local police departments recognize that their effectiveness depends upon developing relationships with
the communities that they serve and that they must gain the trust and confidence of the residents they are charged with
protecting regardless of immigration status. When immigrants believe that their immigration status may be questioned,
they will hesitate to come forward to report a crime or other relevant information.
Ironically, one of the main arguments cited in favor of police-immigration enforcement initiatives is that they will make anti-
terrorism efforts more effective. The argument has two serious flaws. First, it assumes that persons with immigration law
violations are more likely to be terrorists. Second, because the federal government’s anti-terrorism initiatives rely on
encouraging individuals to report suspicious activity, police enforcement of immigration laws may hinder, rather than
assist, law enforcement in its efforts to combating terrorism. Immigrants with information regarding potential terrorist
activity may be less likely to contact the police out of fear of being questioned about their own immigration status. Since
9/11, many elected officials, community leaders, and law enforcement professionals, including CIA and FBI counter-
terrorism experts, have argued for de-linking
immigration and counter-terrorism policies, saying that the immigrant-focused security measures passed after 9/11 have
made us less safe.
4. The Safety and Lives of Victims of Domestic Violence, Trafficking, and Other Crimes Are at Risk
Immigration enforcement by local police will have a particularly significant impact on domestic violence victims.
Years of experience have shown that one of the primary reasons immigrants do not report domestic violence is fear of
deportation. New police policies on immigration enforcement would have a severe chilling effect on domestic violence
reporting because they will heighten the fear of deportation. In particular, many domestic violence victims rely on their U.S.
citizen or lawful permanent resident spouses for their immigration status, but do not know that they may be eligible to
legalize their immigration status through provisions of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) and other laws. The fact
that the same police officers to whom they must report domestic violence also would be responsible for investigating their
immigration status will make victims of domestic violence even warier of stepping forward to report crimes.
Indeed, some of the most egregious forms of organized crime and violence take their heaviest toll on immigrants.
In particular, victims of trafficking, such as women and children forced into prostitution or individuals forced to work long
hours in slavery-like conditions, are almost always immigrants. They almost always lack legal documentation of their
immigration status, either because their traffickers brought them into the U.S. unlawfully, or because their passports have
been confiscated. These victims fear going to the police for help because (like domestic violence victims) they believe that
they will be deported and/or that their perpetrators will go unpunished once the police learn that they lack documentation.
5. Immigration Enforcement Heightens the Risk of Racial Profiling
When police are instructed to identify persons whom they have reason to believe have violated immigration laws, it
increases the likelihood they will examine with heightened suspicion members of certain ethnic minority groups that are
immigrating to the United States in particularly large numbers. Some officers will stop and question people based on their
ethnic background or their accent, leading to violations of the rights of U.S. citizens and legal residents whose only offense
is “looking foreign.” Racial profiling that results from immigration enforcement will affect citizens and legal residents as
well as undocumented immigrants. Furthermore, many communities of color already have strained relations with the
police, which immigration enforcement by those authorities will likely worsen.
Copyright © 2006 Hispanic Institute of Social Issues
Into Gray Areas, Local Police and Federal Immigration Enforcement", analyzing whether local law enforcement should be
enforcing federal immigration law. Appleseed's report outlines the legal history behind the enforcement of federal
immigration laws by local agencies, and points out the reasons why an increase in this type of collaboration is a "bad
public policy" decision. Many police departments, local governments, and organizations around the country are opposing
increased local police involvement in federal immigration laws, but cities like Phoenix, Arizona and its Police Department
have expanded their role to report undocumented individuals to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
Excerpt
Local Police Enforcement of Immigration Laws Jeopardizes Public Safety
Why local police should not stop, question, arrest, or detain individuals suspected of violating federal immigration laws is
not always immediately apparent to the public. It can be initially attractive to believe that involving local police in
immigration enforcement could reduce the likelihood of a terrorist attack or provide an important public service by
assisting understaffed federal agents. The negative effects on public safety affect all members of a community, not just
the immigrant population.
1. Adding Immigration Enforcement to the Duties of Local Law Enforcement Is a Strain on Already Limited Resources
Local and state law enforcement agencies frequently do not have sufficient resources to effectively carry out the primary
tasks of criminal and civil law enforcement. Many local police departments and sheriffs oppose immigration enforcement
initiatives. Some have publicly stated that they will not proactively enforce immigration laws, or that they oppose coercive
efforts such as the Border Protection Act that would require them to undertake immigration enforcement. One reason local
police departments oppose immigration enforcement initiatives is that they burden departments that are already under-
resourced and under-staffed. It is important to note that federal funding for 287(g) agreements covers very few costs and
that the funding
is uncertain.
2. Federal Immigration Law Is Complex and Technical
Local police lack expertise in federal immigration law, which is notoriously complex, extremely technical, and frequently
subject to change. Immigration laws have been compared to the tax code in their complexity, and a wide range of factors
and documents contribute to the determination of a person’s immigration status. Asking the police to assess individuals’
immigration status is like asking them to stay abreast of tax law and calculate individuals’ refunds as they enforce other
laws.
3. Immigration Enforcement by Police Undermines Their Efforts to Build Trust with Immigrant Communities and May
Impede Anti-Terrorism Efforts
The most alarming aspect of police enforcement of immigration law is that it undermines the many community policing
initiatives that have developed over the past decade, which are a significant factor in the declining crime rate during that
same time. Many local police departments recognize that their effectiveness depends upon developing relationships with
the communities that they serve and that they must gain the trust and confidence of the residents they are charged with
protecting regardless of immigration status. When immigrants believe that their immigration status may be questioned,
they will hesitate to come forward to report a crime or other relevant information.
Ironically, one of the main arguments cited in favor of police-immigration enforcement initiatives is that they will make anti-
terrorism efforts more effective. The argument has two serious flaws. First, it assumes that persons with immigration law
violations are more likely to be terrorists. Second, because the federal government’s anti-terrorism initiatives rely on
encouraging individuals to report suspicious activity, police enforcement of immigration laws may hinder, rather than
assist, law enforcement in its efforts to combating terrorism. Immigrants with information regarding potential terrorist
activity may be less likely to contact the police out of fear of being questioned about their own immigration status. Since
9/11, many elected officials, community leaders, and law enforcement professionals, including CIA and FBI counter-
terrorism experts, have argued for de-linking
immigration and counter-terrorism policies, saying that the immigrant-focused security measures passed after 9/11 have
made us less safe.
4. The Safety and Lives of Victims of Domestic Violence, Trafficking, and Other Crimes Are at Risk
Immigration enforcement by local police will have a particularly significant impact on domestic violence victims.
Years of experience have shown that one of the primary reasons immigrants do not report domestic violence is fear of
deportation. New police policies on immigration enforcement would have a severe chilling effect on domestic violence
reporting because they will heighten the fear of deportation. In particular, many domestic violence victims rely on their U.S.
citizen or lawful permanent resident spouses for their immigration status, but do not know that they may be eligible to
legalize their immigration status through provisions of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) and other laws. The fact
that the same police officers to whom they must report domestic violence also would be responsible for investigating their
immigration status will make victims of domestic violence even warier of stepping forward to report crimes.
Indeed, some of the most egregious forms of organized crime and violence take their heaviest toll on immigrants.
In particular, victims of trafficking, such as women and children forced into prostitution or individuals forced to work long
hours in slavery-like conditions, are almost always immigrants. They almost always lack legal documentation of their
immigration status, either because their traffickers brought them into the U.S. unlawfully, or because their passports have
been confiscated. These victims fear going to the police for help because (like domestic violence victims) they believe that
they will be deported and/or that their perpetrators will go unpunished once the police learn that they lack documentation.
5. Immigration Enforcement Heightens the Risk of Racial Profiling
When police are instructed to identify persons whom they have reason to believe have violated immigration laws, it
increases the likelihood they will examine with heightened suspicion members of certain ethnic minority groups that are
immigrating to the United States in particularly large numbers. Some officers will stop and question people based on their
ethnic background or their accent, leading to violations of the rights of U.S. citizens and legal residents whose only offense
is “looking foreign.” Racial profiling that results from immigration enforcement will affect citizens and legal residents as
well as undocumented immigrants. Furthermore, many communities of color already have strained relations with the
police, which immigration enforcement by those authorities will likely worsen.
Copyright © 2006 Hispanic Institute of Social Issues
| Grassroots Journalism www.barriozona.com |
