PREPARED FOR:

Breaking ICE’s Hold

Presented by:

Angela Chan

Senior Staff Attorney and Policy Director

Advancing Justice – Asian Law Caucus

About us

Advancing Justice - Asian Law Caucus

San Francisco, CA

Founded in 1972, Asian Americans Advancing Justice - Asian Law Caucus is the nation’s first public interest law office representing the civil and human rights of Asian American and Pacific Islander communities.

2

3

•Under President Obama, an estimated two million immigrants have

been deported. This is more than any prior president

•$18 billion spent on immigration enforcement in FY 2012.

The Problem:

Deportation Crisis

The Problem:

Impact of Deportation Crisis

4

Families Torn Apart:

• Between 2010 and 2012,

about 23% of all

deportations—or, 204,810

deportations—were issued

for parents with US citizen

children.

• In 2011, at least 5,100

children were in foster care

because parents detained or

deported.

The Problem:

How does ICE deport 400,000 per year?

5

With the “help” of local police as force-multipliers, expanding ICE’s presence in jails and on the streets:

ICE Access Programs• 287(g) program (deputizing local law enforcement

for immigration enforcement)• Criminal Alien Program (ICE access to jails)• Secure Communities Program (fingerprints taken by

local law enforcement checked by ICE)

6

287(g)

SECURE

COMMUNITIES

CRIMINAL

ALIEN

PROGRAM

DHS

S-Comm Program:

Police as ―Force Multipliers‖

Local Law Enforcement

State Identification

BureauState Criminal

Background Check

FBI

(CJIS Database)

Federal criminal background check

DHS (IDENT

Database)

S-Comm Civil Immigration

Background Check

Match: Undocumented

or LPR

No Match

ICE Hold:

7

THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE PROCESS

If ICE hold

has been

issued, you

can be held

on an ICE

hold anytime

when criminal

matter allows

release.

The Problem:

Who have ICE holds been issued on?

10

• Nationally, ICE issued almost 1 million ICE hold requests from 2008 to 2012.

• 77.4% of the detainers issued by ICE were for individuals without criminal

convictions either at the time the detainer was issued or subsequently.

• For the remaining 22.6% that had a criminal record, only 8.6 percent of the

charges were classified as a Level 1 offense.

ICE will not turn off S-Comm.

ICE won’t end 287(g).

ICE continually expands Criminal Alien Program

(CAP).

But what if the police refuse to hold people

for ICE to pick up?

287(g)

SECURE

COMMUNITIES

CRIMINAL

ALIEN

PROGRAM

DHSICE

1. Voluntary

2. Undermines public safety

3. Financial burden

4. Due Process: Not a

criminal warrant

5. Limits: Can NOT hold

beyond 48 hours,

excluding weekends and

holidays

The Solution:

Dispel Myths about ICE Holds

Stronger Local ICE hold Reform:

New Case Law

13

Galarza v. Szalczyk (March 4, 2014)

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit held that ICE detainers are

voluntary, not mandatory. Therefore, Lehigh County, PA cannot avoid liability

for holding an individual who is not deportable for ICE by arguing that

detainers are mandatory.

Maria Miranda-Olivares v. Clackamas County (April 11, 2014)

The federal district court in Portland, Oregon

found that ICE holds violate Fourth Amendment

against unreasonable search and seizure

because they are not signed by a judge and

are not based on probable cause finding.

The Court held that the County was liable for

damages pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for choosing

to detain Ms. Miranda-Oliveras on an ICE hold.

Stronger Local ICE hold Reform:

Letter to All CA County Counsel and Sheriffs

14

May 2, 2014

County X

Re: Recent Federal Court Decision Finding it Unlawful for a Sheriff’s Department to

Honor ICE Detainer Requests

Dear Sheriff/Counsel:

We are writing to alert you to an important ruling by a federal court in Oregon, which concluded

that detention pursuant to a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (―ICE‖)

detainer request violated the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. In response to this

ruling, and as of the date of this letter, 37 counties and cities in the States of Oregon,

Washington, and Colorado have decided to stop holding individuals on ICE detainers to avoid

damages liability for complying with such requests. We ask that you follow suit and stop

complying with ICE detainers, unless or until such detainers are accompanied by a judicial

determination of probable cause to satisfy the requirements of the Fourth Amendment.

National Impact

Currently, about 240 total jurisdictions nationally limiting ICE holds.

• Includes 3 states (CA, CT, and RI), city and county ordinances or resolutions, and large number of recent announcements from Sheriffs who fear liability for unconstitutional detention.

•Most of these jurisdictions do not respond to any ICE holds.

15

Source for Map:

Immigrant Legal Resource Center,

http://www.ilrc.org/enforcement

The CA TRUST Act

16

The Solution:

Local and State Coalition Building

17

• Beginning in 2010, regional meetings throughout CA on S-Comm.

• Formation of state coalition in 2011:

• Immigrant rights, faith, domestic violence service providers, labor

• Weekly calls with statewide coalition

• Report back on regional work and statewide coordination

• Coalition consulted before decisions made on TRUST Act

The Solution:

Statewide Coalition Members

18

Co-Sponsors:

Asian Americans Advancing Justice - Asian

Law Caucus

National Day Laborer Organizing Network

California Immigrant Policy Center

American Civil Liberties Union

Mexican American Legal Defense and

Educational Fund

Organizational Support

American Friends Service Committee’s

Asian Americans for Civil Rights & Equality

Asian Law Alliance

Bill of Rights Defense Committee

Black Alliance for Just Immigration

California Catholic Conference

California Communities United Institute

California Immigrant Youth Justice Alliance

California Partnership to End Domestic

Violence

California Public Defenders Association

California Teachers Association

Cal-Islanders Humanitarian Association

Canal Alliance

Central American Resource Center

Central Valley Partnership for Citizenship

Centro Legal de la Raza

Chico City Council Member Randall Stone

Chinese for Affirmative Action

Council on American-Islamic Relations

Diocese of Orange

Dream Team LA

East Bay Interfaith Committee for Worker

Justice

East bay Sanctuary Covenant

Filipino Advocates for Justice

Fresno Immigrant Youth in Action

Fresno Interdenominational Refugee

Ministries

Graton Day Labor Center

Greater Long Beach Interfaith Community

Organization, PICO

Golden State Bail Agents Association

Immigrant Legal Resource Center

Immigration Center for Women and

Children

Immigration Task Force of the California

Nevada Annual Conference of the United

Methodist Church

Inland Congregations United for Change

Inland Empire Immigrant Youth Coalition

Interfaith Coalition for Immigrant Rights -

Clergy and Laity United for Economic

Justice

Jewish Community Relations Council

Justice for Immigrants Coalition

L.A. Gay and Lesbian Center

Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights

Lutheran Office of Public Policy – California

Mujeres Unidas y Activas

National Association of Social Workers

National Immigration Law Center

Out4Immigration

PANGEA Legal Services

People’s Democratic Club of Santa Cruz

County

PICO California

Reform California, California Reform Jewish

Movement

San Diego LGBT Community Center

San Francisco Immigrant Rights

Commission

Santa Cruz County Latino Affairs

Commission

Services, Immigrant Rights and Education

Network

Silicon Valley Community Foundation

UAW Local 4123, Sacramento, CA

UAW Local 5810, Berkeley, CA

Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry

Action, Network, CA

Women’s Foundation of California

Highlight Stories:

S-Comm Harms Victims of Crime

• In Lodi, CA, two young children

are without their mother because

she was deported under S-

Comm after a call for help

regarding domestic violence.1

• In SF, Norma called the police for

help when her partner was

beating her, ended up in jail for 5

days.

• In LA, Isaura, 20 years old,

called police for help.

Transferred from hospital to jail

because of S-Comm.

• In Maryland, Maria was taken

into ICE custody after she called

the police in DV case.

19

1. “Deported Mexicans leave two small kids in Lodi,”Sacramento Bee, Nov. 2, 2010.

http://www.sacbee.com/2010/11/02/v-print/3151148/deported-

mexicans-leave-two-small.html

The Solution:

ICE holds are voluntary

In December 2012, Attorney General Kamala

Harris issued a bulletin explaining “immigration

detainers are not compulsory.‖

20

The Solution:

TRUST Act Campaign (2013)

21

Bill focused on ICE hold reform.

Bill passed Assembly, then Gov. Brown’s office provides

amendments.

July 2013: Dreamers hold sit-in in Gov. Brown’s office after

Senate Public Safety Committee vote. Creates leverage for push

back against problematic amendments (e.g., prior orders of

removal).

July to Oct 2013: Phone banking, petitions, US congressional

delegation letter, law professor letter urging Gov. Brown to sign.

Oct 5, 2013. Gov. Brown signed TRUST Act into law.

CA TRUST Act (AB 4)

Prohibits local jails from detaining individuals in

response to ICE hold requests, except in limited

circumstances.

If exception applies, local law enforcement may

respond to hold (but not required).

Sets statewide floor, not a ceiling

(local counties can do more).

Effective on Jan. 1, 2014.

22

Implementing the TRUST Act

1. Supporting stronger local reform and more state TRUST Acts

2. Monitor implementation and compliance

3. Engagement with Sheriffs and Juvenile Probation

4. Educate community members, advocates, and attorneys about TRUST Act protections

23

Monitoring Violations

24

CA Tort Act Claims filed in LA, Merced, and Sacramento County

Martin Del Agua: Arrested on Friday, Feb. 7, 2014 after neighbor called

about Mr. Del Agua playing music in his garage. Arrested and held on

ICE hold for 48 hours in violation of TRUST Act. Released on Sunday,

Feb. 10, 2014 after TRUST Act legal team responded. Administrative

CA Tort claim filed and pending.

Problematic Practices and Provisions

1. Notification to ICE upon release

2. Questionnaires to all ―foreign-born‖ detainees on immigration status

3. Release to ICE at booking and release, prior to 48 hour ICE hold

4. Home raids after local law enforcement contact

5. Civil immigration warrants (I-200 form)

6. Transportation by local law enforcement to ICE

25

Community Education

www.catrustact.org website with resources and reporting form

Webinars and trainings for attorneys and community members

26

Community Education

Toolkit on rights under the TRUST Act and how to advocate for implementation - DEVELOPING

Know your rights palm cards on TRUST Act - UPDATED

27

Stronger Local ICE hold Reform:45 out of 58 Counties Adopt Policies of ―No ICE Holds‖

28

Alameda County

Butte County

Calaveras County

Contra Costa County

Del Norte

Glenn County

Humboldt County

Imperial County

Inyo County

Kings County

Lake County

Los Angeles

Marin County

Mariposa County

Mendocino County

Merced County

Mono

Monterey County

Napa County

Nevada

Orange County

Riverside

San Benito

Sacramento County

San Bernardino County

San Diego Policy

San Francisco County

San Joaquin County

San Luis Obispo County

San Mateo County

Santa Barbara County

Santa Clara County

Santa Cruz County

Shasta County

Siskiyou

Solano County

Sonoma County

Sutter County

Tehema County

Trinity County

Tulare County

Tuolumne County

Ventura County

Yolo County

Yuba County

Counties with policies of ―no ICE holds‖:

California Impact:Declines in Releases to ICE on ICE Holds,

Comparing Jan-Feb 2013 to Jan-Feb 2014

• Imperial 59 > 50 = 15%

• Los Angeles 1,143 > 818 = 28%

• Merced 53 > 26 = 51%

• Riverside 27 > 105 = 62%

• San Bernardino 280 > 93 = 67%

• San Diego 426 > 180 = 58%

• San Francisco 60 > 4 = 93%

• San Joaquin 105 > 24 = 77%

• San Luis Obispo 29 > 28 = 3%

• Santa Barbara 94 > 76 = 19%

• Solano 21 > 12 = 43%

• Sonoma 103 > 27 = 74%

• Stanislaus 58 > 40 = 31%

• Tulare 128 > 86 = 33%

• Ventura 149 > 91 = 39%

Source: Amy Taxin, “California holds far fewer

for illegal immigration,” Associate Press, April 6,

2014, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-

wires/20140406/us--immigration-enforcement-

california-glance/?utm_hp_ref=media&ir=media.

National Impact:Immigration Reform

30

Immigration Reform

National Impact:#Not1More Campaign

31

Closing Thoughts

Successful implementation of TRUST ACT is

fundamental to federal reform:

1) TRUST Act must be floor, not ceiling, in dynamic trans-local campaign.

2) Successful implementation, replication, and expansion of TRUST Act

creates: (a) upward pressure on federal government and (b) lateral

pressure on Arizona type jurisdictions.

3) S-Comm, one day, will be a legalization implementation issue and not

an enforcement issue. We need to move the policy needle now to prevent

rollback and horse-trading in eventual immigration reform legislation.

32

Questions?

Angela Chan

Senior Staff Attorney and Policy Director

Advancing Justice –Asian Law Caucus

angelac@advancingjustice-alc.org