By SARAH SMITH 3/3/17
Sanders said federal agents in two unmarked cars pulled them over five minutes after they left the news conference in Jackson, where Vargas had joined clergy, civil rights lawyers and advocates in speaking out against President Trump’s immigration policies.
“They rushed around the vehicle and opened Dany’s side of her door and they were just like, ‘You know who we are, you know who we’re here for,’” Sanders said. The agents drove off with her in handcuffs.
…
Vargas’ latest permit expired in November, and she hadn’t been able to pay the $495 renewal fee until February, when she reapplied, said Abigail Peterson, one of her lawyers.
They hope to be able to tell a judge that she has no criminal record (a search by the Mississippi Department of Corrections, done at the request of The Associated Press, showed no convictions), and that she deserves to stay because her DACA status was being renewed.
….
Her detention immediately following the press conference seems like “a mean-spirited attempt at retaliation,” said Mo Goldman, an attorney with the American Immigration Lawyers Association.
The waiver program, which once entitled Argentines to stay in the U.S. for up to 90 days without a visa, required them to waive rights to a hearing before a judge if they overstayed, Goldman said. But “the tricky question is, when someone is seven years old, are they actually waiving their right to a hearing when they enter the United States?”
Danielle Lerner, The (Louisville) Courier-Journal Published 8:00 p.m. ET Feb. 24, 2017
LOUISVILLE, Ky. — The son of legendary boxer Muhammad Ali was detained for hours by immigration officials earlier this month at a Florida airport, according to a family friend.
Muhammad Ali Jr., 44, and his mother, Khalilah Camacho-Ali, the first wife of Muhammad Ali, were arriving at Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport on Feb. 7 after returning from speaking at a Black History Month event in Montego Bay, Jamaica. They were pulled aside while going through customs because of their Arabic-sounding names, according to family friend and lawyer Chris Mancini.
Immigration officials let Camacho-Ali go after she showed them a photo of herself with her ex-husband, but her son did not have such a photo and wasn’t as lucky. Mancini said officials held and questioned Ali Jr. for nearly two hours, repeatedly asking him, “Where did you get your name from?” and “Are you Muslim?”
When Ali Jr. responded that yes, he is a Muslim, the officers kept questioning him about his religion and where he was born. Ali Jr. was born in Philadelphia in 1972 and holds a U.S. passport.
Muhammad Ali Jr. detained by immigration officials at Fla. airport
What a difference an election can make.
Not long ago, Maricopa County was regarded as the country’s most hostile locality for those living in the United States illegally. With a combination of anti-immigration state laws and a sheriff to enforce them zealously, the county became a deportation machine, its jails accounting for more immigration holds than anywhere else in the country.
But on Friday evening, less than two months into his tenure as Maricopa County sheriff, Paul Penzone unveiled his first major policy announcement: MCSO jails no longer would detain individuals for Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
All inmates, legal residents or not, will be released from jail when the period of time for detention authorized under Arizona state law is up. Until Friday, the jail would issue courtesy “detainers” for the federal government, jailing individuals for up to 48 hours longer than they would otherwise be held for their criminal case, and setting in motion deportation proceedings.
Penzone’s statement at a hastily arranged event underscores a remarkable procedural shift from his predecessor, Sheriff Joe Arpaio. Rather than leading the charge against illegal immigration, Maricopa County likely is now the only county in the state to reject one of ICE’s key partnerships with local jurisdictions.
A statement from ICE Saturday called the new policy an “immediate, dangerous change.”
“MCSO has implemented a policy which will undoubtedly result in dangerous criminal aliens being released to the street to re-victimize the innocent citizens of that community,” the statement said. “Additionally, the new policy puts ICE officers at a higher risk as more fugitive operations teams will need to arrest criminal aliens outside of the secure confines of the county jail.”
Enrique Lucero, field office director for ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations in Phoenix, said in a statement, “This sudden change in posture is unfortunate. Immigration detainers have been a successful enforcement tool to prevent the release of dangerous criminals to our streets and mitigate the possibility of future crimes being committed against the residents of our communities.”
A statement Saturday from the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office said Penzone’s decision came after consulting with the office, which is the legal adviser for Maricopa County officials. It cited cases around the country, including one in Dallas County, Texas, that said that county officials without certain federal authority may not rely on a civil immigration detainer to maintain custody of individuals beyond the time it would take to release them under state law.
The decision was hailed by immigration-rights advocates, but it also raised concerns with some Republican elected officials, who say the policy should be finessed to ensure compliance with the federal government.
“The county needs to find some way to make sure that these ICE-targeted illegal aliens aren’t released on the street but wind up in federal custody where they belong,” said state Rep.John Kavanagh of Fountain Hills, a co-sponsor of the controversial Senate Bill 1070.
Penzone said Friday that the sheriff’s office would continue to work with ICE agents but would not facilitate departing inmates’ transfer to ICE. He could not offer clarification on how ICE agents would collect those the agency deemed fit for deportation.
“ICE will have to take a more aggressive position on how to act on those,” Penzone said.
The statement from ICE Saturday said it would continue to seek to collaborate with the sheriff’s office and with other law enforcement agencies in the Phoenix area "to help ensure that individuals who may pose a threat to our communities are not released onto the street to potentially reoffend and harm our citizens.“
Federal judges rule against ICE detainers
A map published by the Immigrant Legal Resource Center shows that all Arizona jails were complying with ICE detainers as of December 2016. The Arizona Republic has found no evidence that any other county has dropped that collaboration in the intervening weeks.
Calls and emails to local sheriff departments on Saturday largely went unanswered, but representatives for Yuma and Yavapai counties said their jails would continue to honor ICE’s requested detainers.
Angie Junck, supervising attorney for the Immigrant Legal Resource Center, said it was the center’s understanding that Maricopa County was the first to drop the ICE holds.
Junck said similar policy changes in other states have sparked ripple effects in neighboring counties.
RELATED: No more ‘courtesy holds’ for federal immigration agents
Penzone on Friday said his decision was based on the advice of the county attorney’s office, and due to a “threat of litigation.” Although the sheriff did not specify to which lawsuit he was referring, advocates believe it was a December complaint in federal court, in which a U.S. citizen held on a detainer alleged the process was unconstitutional.
Junck also said ICE and localities across the country have faced similar lawsuits, and courts have unanimously ruled against the detainers.
“On every single case, this is a violation of the Fourth Amendment,” she said, referring to the amendment in the U.S. Constitution that bans unreasonable searches and seizures.
RELATED: Police show little appetite for Trump immigration order
Immigration advocates say that the detainers effectively amount to a new arrest, since individuals otherwise would have been released from jail. Because ICE holds incarcerate without probable cause, advocates and many courts say they violate an individual’s rights against unlawful arrest and detention.
Although ICE detainers are still widely accepted across the country, federal judges in Pennsylvania, California and Oregon have all ruled against detainers in some fashion, Junck said. A case heard by the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Lehigh County, Pennsylvania, authorities did not have to enforce ICE detainers because they were not mandatory.
Junck said many jurisdictions saw the writing on the wall and cut ties with ICE before litigation.
She cited changes in California, where more than 100 jurisdictions revised their policies on ICE holds after an Oregon federal court ruling, according to a 2014 article in the Orange County Register. The Oregon judge found that Clackamas County had unlawfully detained a woman and would have to pay her in damages.
“In California, the sheriff’s council did an analysis, and said ‘This is not worth the liability,’” Junck said.
In Arizona, strong support continues for the holds
For many law-enforcement officials and politicians in Arizona, the change in policy might be a tough sell.
Asked recently about President Donald Trump’s efforts to expand federal immigration authority to local police, Republican Pinal County Sheriff Mark Lamb said his agency will continue aiding the federal government in apprehending those who crossed the border illegally.
In a statement to The Republic Saturday, Yuma County Sheriff’s Office spokesman Alfonso Zavala said the jails there will continue to honor ICE detainers for individuals held on state charges.
“Yuma County does notify ICE when an inmate is being released, at which time they respond to our facility and assume custody,” he said. “We do not have the same issues as some Northern and remote counties throughout the United States, where ICE is unable to pick up inmates during normal release times, and cannot comment on their policies and procedures.”
State Rep. Kavanagh, who on Friday night told the Republic he was “very disappointed” in the decision and might attempt to take away state funding, softened his stance when reached again on Saturday.
Kavanagh said he would have to talk to Senate attorneys to figure out how federal judges’ decisions outside the appeals court for Arizona, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, restrict ICE detainers in Arizona. While those decisions are technically not binding here, Kavanagh said he would hope to explore new ways to coordinate with ICE without potentially violating court orders.
Those actions could include an early alert to ICE before release, or a contract to set aside cells in the county jail specifically for ICE detainees, he said.
“These ICE detainers have been honored all around the country for years, except for in sanctuary cities. Circuit court decisions are creating a cloud of uncertainty over the detainers,” Kavanagh said.
“I would want to talk to our attorneys to see the reasonableness of the action and also possibly explore other actions that the county could take if it continues not honoring ICE detainers to demonstrate that they are in fact willing to enforce federal law as fully as possible.”
Sheriff: Immigration agents will remain at jails
Penzone on Friday said Maricopa County jails would not be dropping their relationship with ICE. An ICE representative will remain in the jails and still will screen all who are booked in. The changes will come at the back end, when a defendant is to be released. Though ICE agents will receive a notification when one of their flagged detainees is released, they will no longer be held for longer than a U.S. citizen.
If ICE agents wish to detain these individuals on their own, Penzone said, “ICE will have to take a more aggressive position.” The sheriff did not offer any other logistical details on this point, however.
RELATED:New lawsuit challenges immigration holds in jails
It was unclear how many inmates typically are on 48-hour holds in Maricopa County jails. A spokesman for the Sheriff’s Office said there were 2,581 Maricopa County jail releases to ICE in 2016 and 249 to date in 2017.
Penzone would not provide details, but the “threat of litigation” to which he referred may involve a lawsuit filed in December by Jacinta Gonzalez Goodman, who was arrested in March and held overnight in jail without probable cause based on a detainer request. Gonzalez, a Mexican-born U.S. citizen, said she should have been freed the evening prior, when a judge had released her on her own recognizance.
Gonzalez’s attorney, Mark Fleming with the National Immigrant Justice Center, said the timing of Penzone’s announcement would point to his client. He said although the lawsuit was filed in court in December, the complaint was officially served to Penzone last week.
Fleming said Penzone’s announcement was a step in the right direction but doesn’t mean the lawsuit is over.
“We have concerns about a blanket discrimination (by using) place of birth as a metric,” he said. “We’re concerned that ICE officers in the jail are not acting appropriately.”
Fleming said he hopes the lawsuit and Penzone’s words send a signal to other Arizona localities, particularly in light of the new presidential administration. Key elements of President Trump’s immigration plans rely on the aid of police and jails, he said.
“Against the backdrop of the administration’s executive order … we want to remind folks that what ICE is asking currently is unlawful,” he said. “And the thought that the administration would try to force localities to do something that is unlawful is really concerning, and hopefully would not stand up in court.”
By MICHAEL EDISON HAYDEN
Feb 12, 2017, 3:57 PM ET
But ACLU senior attorney Lee Gelernt told ABC News that while they were “not pleased” with Obama’s handling of deportation raids, his group is concerned that the Trump administration will expand those efforts.
The rapid response team would bring together the ACLU, private law firms and local community groups to ensure that individuals facing deportations have access to counsel right away.
“This administration is just getting started and we’re anticipating much worse,” Gelernt said in a phone interview, citing the language Trump uses about immigrants as his reasoning for his concern that Trump’s approach could be more severe than Obama’s. “His rhetoric is already scaring a lot of people in immigrant communities.”
By AMY TAXIN and ALICIA A. CALDWELL
2/11/17
LOS ANGELES (AP) — Advocacy groups say that Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers are rounding up people in large numbers around the country as part of stepped-up enforcement under President Donald Trump.
They say a roundup in Southern California was especially heavy-handed and cite arrests in places such as Atlanta, Chicago, New York, Texas and North Carolina that have rattled immigrants.
The government says it’s simply enforcing the laws and conducting routine enforcement targeting immigrants in the country illegally with criminal records. Authorities say it’s no different than what happened during the Obama years on a regular basis.
The truth lies somewhere in between. Here are some of the facts surrounding what’s happening with immigration enforcement.
TRUMP VS. OBAMA …
The president’s [Trump] order also said enforcement priorities would include convicted criminals, immigrants who had been arrested for any criminal offense, those who committed fraud, and anyone who may have committed a crime.
Under President Barack Obama, the government focused on immigrants in the country illegally who posed a threat to national security or public safety and recent border crossers. But despite the narrower focus, more than 2 million people were deported during Obama’s time in office, including a record of more than 409,000 people in 2012. At one point, he was dubbed the “Deporter in Chief” by his critics.
The record was reached with the help of the Secure Communities program that helped the government identify immigrants in the country illegally who had been arrested. In the latter half of Obama’s tenure, deportations plummeted to lows matching those of former President George W. Bush’s term.
…
ARE THE LATEST RAIDS A DIRECT RESULT OF TRUMP’S ORDER? …
The agency called it an “enforcement surge” that was no different than enforcement actions carried out in the past and said a “rash of recent reports about purported ICE checkpoints and random sweeps are false, dangerous, and irresponsible.” In a statement, the agency said “officers frequently encounter additional suspects who may be in the United States in violation of the federal immigration laws. Those persons will be evaluated on a case by case basis and, when appropriate, arrested by ICE.”
THE NEW NORMAL?
Despite the claims that this is business as usual, an indication of the changed tactics came earlier in the week when Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly testified before Congress. He told lawmakers immigration agents expressed frustration about that they were not fully allowed to enforce immigration laws under the Obama administration. He predicted Trump’s directives would end that frustration.
The ICE raids themselves are not new. Obama deported more people than the vast majority of presidents before him. You can check the Dept of Homeland Security historical stats here and more recent stats here. He earned that moniker of “Deporter in Chief.” His policy of targeting recent immigrants included women, children, and families.
What does seem to be new, is that anyone caught up in the ICE raids is now vulnerable. It used to be that, officially, ICE wasn’t supposed to focus on people who had been here in the States more than a couple years and who didn’t pose a threat to “national security or public safety.”
Now, with Trump’s new executive order, the definition of who is a “criminal” is so broad that anyone can be pulled off the street or caught up in the wider net of a raid, and the government will put effort into deporting them. Doesn’t matter how long you’ve been here or how much you’ve contributed to society, as long as someone can look at you and say, “Well, you MAY HAVE committed a crime,” you’re a priority for deportation. And THAT is a recipe for even more discrimination and abuse of power.
AP FACT CHECK: Are immigration raids result of Trump policy?
2/5/17
Up to 8 million people in the country illegally could be considered
priorities for deportation, according to calculations by the Los Angeles
Times. They were based on interviews with experts who studied the
order and two internal documents that signal immigration officials are
taking an expansive view of Trump’s directive.Far from targeting only “bad hombres,” as Trump has said
repeatedly, his new order allows immigration agents to detain nearly
anyone they come in contact with who has crossed the border illegally.
People could be booked into custody for using food stamps or if their child receives free school lunches….“We are going back to enforcement chaos — they are going to give lip
service to going after criminals, but they really are going to round up
everybody they can get their hands on,” said David Leopold, a former
president of the American Immigration Lawyers Assn. and an immigration
lawyer for more than two decades.
Not just ‘bad hombres’: Trump is targeting up to 8 million people for deportation
Lawblr side of Tumblr, here. I don’t think anybody even understands how terrifying this is. If the Executive can ignore the Judiciary, then we have a full-on Constitutional Crisis on our hands. Our country immediately falls apart. The only options for enforcement of judicial orders are 1) U.S. Marshals (which are ordered around by the Judiciary but ultimately still a part of the Executive as part of the Department of Justice), in which case we have an ACTUAL ARMED CONFLICT BETWEEN TWO BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT, or if the Marshals refuse to comply, 2) the Governor of the state, say Virginia, sends in the National Guard of the state, which leads to AN ARMED CONFLICT BETWEEN A STATE MILITIA AND THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
In case you weren’t getting the picture, let me be blunt and dramatic: this is literally Civil War-level shit right here.
And Trump has been in office a week.
This is fucking terrifying.
I spent the day at SeaTac (Seattle-Tacoma International Airport). We got very little done because CBP refused to talk to us at all. When one of the attorneys with us annoyed them so much that they finally answered their office door (she literally knocked on it for 10 minutes straight), they directed her to the press release on their website (side note: I don’t know if there even is a press release on the CBP website). They told her they don’t care how many attorneys show up, they don’t take orders from attorneys or judges. Senator Patty Murray showed up just after 4:00 & CBP refused to talk to her, too. I will repeat that: Customs and Border Patrol refused to talk to a sitting United States Senator. They refused other senators at other airports, too, according to a WaPo article I read earlier.
I had to return to Portland tonight because I have work tomorrow. ACLU & International Refugee Assistance Project attorneys will be back at SeaTac tomorrow at 5:30 a.m. (including my law school bestie, I am so proud).
There were 13 people detained at SeaTac yesterday who were secretly transferred to a detention facility in Tacoma, so the Northwest Immigrant Rights Project is working with attorneys to straighten that right out.
Basically: Shit is going down, y’all. The women I went up with today? Both were Arabs. One was from Pakistan, the other was from Lebanon (a Christian, a Muslim and a Jew walk into an airport…). When I asked them if I was overreacting by feeling like this was a coup-in-progress, they said no. That’s precisely what this is.
I thought we had a coup-proof system. I was mistaken.
Keep fighting the good fight, lawyers. And if you’re in Portland, I’ll see you at Perkins-Coie tomorrow at 5:30 for the L4GG meeting.
At Dulles, CBP has been stonewalling four members of the US House of Representatives, the governer and attorney general of Virginia, and Senators Cory Booker (NJ) and Mark Warner (VA)–the latter of whom chewed out the head of CBP in person. No dice. Not even with a federal court order telling CBP at Dulles, only them, and them in particular to give detainees access to lawyers.
And they’re pulling an old trick from the national-security handbook that’s been used to evade the courts on issues like domestic surveillance: “Lawyers and advocates still didn’t know how many people were being held in the secondary inspection area at Dulles or what their immigration status was, which led to a catch-22: Attorneys couldn’t file for contempt of court without having proof that legal residents were being detained and not being given access to lawyers, but they couldn’t get proof without getting access.” (x)
At least two VA reps have found out (via friends and family) about constituents being detained at Dulles, at which point CBP released them in order to dodge the access-to-lawyers issue. The representative for my district is on the warpath–and also on the House Oversight Committee. Here’s hoping these fuckers get slapped with contempt of court so hard their ears ring, then get hauled in front of a committee hearing to see if they want to try their chances with contempt of Congress.
All of which doesn’t even get into the Monday Night Massacre clusterfuck inside the executive branch, when the acting attorney general of the United States refused to make the DoJ defend the lawfulness of the immigration order in court. And was summarily fired and replaced with someone more compliant. So here’s also hoping the Senate puts Jeff Sessions through absolute hell on his role in all this before they vote to confirm him as AG.
It’s like the civics lesson from hell.
Yeah, I need a break, y’all.
Hearseeno 