SB4 Sanctuary Cities Bill Update: Voted Out of Committee, Headed to House for Full Vote

SB4 – the anti-“sanctuary cities” bill

Today the House State Affairs Committee approved a sanctuary cities ban that changes parts of the Senate’s proposal but maintains the bill’s more controversial provisions. But essentially, the bill is unchanged and is heading to the House floor for a full vote.

Rep. Charlie Geren, R-Fort Worth, tried to strike a balance between the bill’s supporters, who want stricter enforcement of immigration laws (e.g., Trump fans, and those who wish to ride the wave of xenophobia and racism while pandering to his alt-right base), and those who are concerned that it punishes local governments too harshly (e.g., cops and everyone else).

SB4 is still unnecessary, racist, cruel, and unconstitutional, and in light of today’s vote, we put this post together to consolidate many of the arguments we’ve heard from law enforcement, legal experts, activists, and religious leaders in one place. All of that below.

We urge you to continue to pressure your House Representatives to oppose SB4 and all of its companion bills: HB 889, HB 611, HB 754, HB 889, and HB 1308.

Please feel free to use this script, or read on for further discussion.

Sample Script A:

“Hi, my name is _________ and I’m calling to urge _________ to go on the record and reject Senate Bill 4. This bill will only increase mistrust in law enforcement, and will do nothing to actually keep us safe. The research shows that legislation like State Bill 4 only drives undocumented crime victims and witnesses into the shadows, and we’ve already seen in the ICE raids in Texas that these deportation raids are not targeting criminals, as over half of the arrests made were of immigrants who didn’t have criminal records, including a woman with a brain tumor being treated for cancer whom agents removed from the hospital, a woman in court who was arrested on a tip by the man who abused her, and hard-working families, now torn apart.

Governor Abbott’s position on sanctuary cities is a cowardly, overt attempt at capitalizing on the wave of anti-immigrant sentiment that Donald Trump exploited during his campaign. But that doesn’t have any place in Texas. We, Rep____’s constituents will not forget ______ position on this matter, and urge him/her to get on the right side of history, or we will be voting him out of office when he/she seeks re-election.”

Sample Script B:

Hi, My name is __________.  As a concerned constituent of the state of Texas, I urge Representative _______ to oppose SB 4 and all companion bills – HB 611, HB 754, HB 889, and HB 1308.  I care about keeping Texans safe and together, this includes my immigrant neighbors. During the SB4 hearing in the House, there were a total of 638 testimonies out of which 619 were against SB4.  I urge Representative _________ to listen to the concerns of those 619 testimonies, which represent the concerns of our communities.  I urge him/her to also consider the testimony of representatives from law enforcement agencies from around the state, such as Austin Police Chief Brian Manley, that said that this bill will erode public trust in police.  In addition, SB4 will lead to racial profiling, which is un-American and un-Texan.  Senate Bill 4 goes against our values as Texans and many Texans oppose this bill, including faith, business, and law enforcement leaders, and I would like to ask Representative ____________ to also oppose SB4.

Read our early explainer on SB4 here, have a look through the data and articles below, and read on below.

Sanctuary cities are safer and more productive, with better economies.

The effects of sanctuary policies on crime and the economy.

Sanctuary cities do not experience an increase in crime.

Fact check: Immigration doesn’t bring crime into U.S., data say.

Urban crime rates and the changing face of immigration: evidence across four decades.

Anatomy of a statistic: do 80% of Americans oppose sanctuary cities?

The myth of the US immigration crisis.

Texas cities see crime rates dropping.

The trouble with immigration detainers.

City of Houston Police Chief’s Message to the Senate State Affairs Committee.

Law enforcement Senate State Affairs testimony against SB4.

Judge shoots down Miami-Dade detention policy adopted to follow Trump deportation order.

Austin ICE Raids: Meet the immigrants arrested.

President isn’t living up to his promise on immigrants.

Immigration agents deport Houston father of two.

ICE detains woman seeking domestic abuse protection at Texas courthouse.

We know that the reason SB4 is being sold to the public is based on a fallacy. This law does nothing to “make us safe.” With few exceptions, immigrants are far less crime prone than natives or have no effect on crime rates; the data we have from numerous studies is broadly one-sided in support of this fact. The overwhelming preponderance of data tells us that so-called ‘sanctuary cities’ have less crime than non-sanctuary cities, and that immigrants commit less crime than natives or have no effect on crime rates. So on its face, SB4 is being sold to the public based on patent falsehoods about “keeping us safe” with zero proof.

If a policy is to change, it should be in response to careful research on whether immigrants actually boost crime rate. But not only is SB4 based on false claims about immigrant crime–SB4 Violates the 10th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. 

Miami-Dade County’s much-criticized decision to allow county jails to hold undocumented immigrants awaiting deportation by federal agents violates the U.S. Constitution, and their decision has already been struck down in federal courThe presiding judge in that case found that the policy violated the Tenth Amendment, which limits the reach of the federal government over states.

Charles Perry and Greg Abbott’s argument in favor of SB4 so far has centered on the fact that elected officials must uphold the “rule of law”. Greg Abbott, Charles Perry, and any Texas Senator or Representative who votes in favor of SB4 are willfully ignoring their duty to uphold the Constitution. You cannot claim to “uphold the Constitution” and uphold the “rule of law” while simultaneously working to undermine it, which is exactly what Charles Perry, Greg Abbott, Dan Patrick, and any other Texas Legislator who support this bill are doing.

The judge in the Miami-Dade case wrote: “States cannot cede their reserved powers to the federal government—no, not even if they wish to do so”. Ironically, Greg Abbott, Charles Perry, Dan Patrick–and mega-wealthy donors like Empower Texans and the Texas Public Policy Foundation behind them who drive the policy decisions of these legislators–constantly claim that they wish to LIMIT what they perceive as federal over-reach, while parroting their love of “liberty”. SB4 exposes their hypocrisy—this law is the very definition of weak capitulation to federal over-reach.

Furthermore, this is a wasteful law—it will only lead to a lengthy court battle, draining state financial resources that could be better spent on things that Texans actually need; and because the law violates the 10th Amendment, it is a legal battle that the State is CERTAIN to lose.

The Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” ICE’s Immigration Detainers have been a central point of controversy surrounding laws like this. Central to that controversy around immigration detainers is the prospect of whether states or localities can be held liable for honoring them. In accordance with Form I-247, federal immigration authorities can issue a detainer when they have:

  • determined that there is reason to believe the individual is an alien subject to removal from the United States,
  • initiated removal proceedings and served a Notice to Appear or other charging document,
  • served a warrant of arrest for removal proceedings, or
  • obtained an order of deportation or removal from the United States for this person.[viii]

The U.S. Supreme Court has articulated an “anti-commandeering” principle, preventing the federal government from ordering state and local officials to carry out federal regulatory programs.

Mandatory ICE detainers would violate the Tenth Amendment’s “Anti-Commandeering Principle”; the legal precedent set in numerous Supreme Court cases shows that SB4 is plainly illegal.

For example, writing in Printz vs. the United States, Justice Antonin Scalia himself wrote that the federal government “may neither issue directives requiring the States to address particular problems, nor command the States’ officers, or those of their political subdivisions, to administer or enforce a federal regulatory program.”

Essentially, what Charles Perry, Greg Abbott and the members of this Legislature who support SB4 are doing is demanding that our local and state law enforcement agencies abdicate their sovereignty, because Donald Trump told them to—that is cowardly and illegal.

Nobody is suggesting that state and local law enforcement cannot or should not work with federal authorities to make their communities safer. On the contrary, we’ve already heard that SB4 makes Texans less safe, which is surely something that Charles Perry, Greg Abbott, and the proponents of this bill do not want.

In essence, those who parrot support for SB4 would rather risk the lives of our law enforcement officers and the lives of Texans so that they can side with Donald Trump.

Charles Perry and Greg Abbott argument in favor of SB4 so far has centered on the fact that elected officials must uphold the “rule of law”.

Greg Abbott, Charles Perry, and any Texas Senator or Representative who votes–or even speaks–in favor of SB4 are willfully ignoring their duty to uphold the Constitution.

You cannot claim to “uphold the Constitution” and uphold the “rule of law” while simultaneously working to undermine it, which is exactly what Charles Perry, Greg Abbott, Dan Patrick, and any other Texas Legislator who support this bill are doing.

Furthermore, law enforcement professionals from across the state are unanimous: SB4 is a bad law that leaves Texans less safe.

Nobody who is arguing against SB4 is suggesting that we should be a country of “open borders”. Of course the U.S. must protect our country from the problems associated with unregulated immigration. But that is already happening, and has been for many years; our borders are more secure than they have ever been. That is a fact. It is not an “alternative fact.” It is a fact. In fact, more Mexicans are LEAVING the U.S. than coming to the U.S.

Greg Abbott has claimed that in refusing to kowtow to Trump’s unconstitutional immigration edict, local officials “implement dangerous policies that make it easier for individuals who commit serious crimes to be placed back into our communities”–this is plainly untrue.

Travis county never said they wouldn’t honor requests from federal immigration officials–but they MUST OBTAIN A WARRANT. Travis county and other policing jurisdictions are already following all state and federal laws, and upholding constitutional rights to due process for all in the criminal justice system.

All this law does is waste law enforcement resources that are already stretched thin, and makes it harder for our officers to protect EVERY Texan and devote their resources to REAL crime—like rape, murder, human trafficking, sex trafficking, and gang violence.

This is already a time of strained law enforcement budgets, and critically low jail and prison bed space. This would have a hugely negative detrimental economic impact on our law enforcement agencies, from which many may never recover. Donald Trump is a notorious con man who has ripped off countless people with whom he had legitimate contracts—there’s no way the Federal government will EVER reimburse Texas for the costs incurred in aiding in its unconstitutional mass deportation program.

Law enforcement professionals from across Texas are in unanimous agreement: SB4 leaves Texans less safeMany Texas lawmakers pay lip service to “backing the blue”; you can’t claim to “back the blue” and then turn around and ignore them. If these lawmakers really wanted to support law enforcement, they would vote NO on SB4 and loudly reject this cowardly, unconstitutional policy of fear.

 

Law enforcement professionals from across the state are unanimous: SB4 makes it harder for them to do their jobs keeping Texans safe.

Solving and preventing crime is a police department’s mission, and law enforcement has been very vocal in their rejection of SB4. In fact, in testimony before the Senate and House State Affairs committee, we heard from

– Houston Police Chief, Art Acevedo

– Harris County Sheriff, Ed Gonzales

– San Antonio Police Chief, William McManus

– Jo Anne Bernal, El Paso Assistant County Attorney

– McAllen Police Chief, Victor Rodriguez

– El Paso County Judge, Veronica Escobar

– El Paso County Sheriff’s Office Commander, Robert Flores

– Many, many more

The top law enforcement brass in Texas are unequivocal in saying SB4 would undermine an already dangerous job. We’ve already seen that play out, with tragic consequences, as with the case of Irvin Gonzales, a woman in El Paso who arrived at a courthouse and was arrested by ICE on a tip from the man who horrifically abused her. Her ex-boyfriend had brutally beaten her several times, but she’d always been afraid to report him because of her undocumented status.

On February 9th, her worst fears were brought to life. A judge was scheduled to hear her request for a protective order against her abusive ex-boyfriend; but ICE officers barged into the courthouse and arrested her! She is currently in a detention facility, awaiting deportation. An associate judge, a court bailiff, three assistant county attorneys, and González’s caseworker all confirmed that González had been taken into custody on the tenth floor of the courthouse. The arrest was also captured on tape.

How is arresting the victim of domestic abuse on a tip from her abuser “keeping us safe?” What message does that send to women—not only undocumented women, but all women—who are afraid to speak out about sexual and physical abuse?

The message that Greg Abbott, Charles Perry, and supporters of SB4 are sending is: “Hide. Stay silent. Don’t report a crime. Because if you do, we will come after you.”

As Police Chief Art Acevedo pointed out in his testimony to this Legislature’s State Affairs committee, SB4 would “negatively affect and undermine the level of trust and cooperation between local police and immigrant communities.”

Anything that undermines the work of police also endangers the lives of policeOur community is safer when people can report crimes without fear of deportation. Many Texas lawmakers pay lip service to “backing the blue”. But when it came time to put those words into action, despite the overwhelming consensus of the voices of those actually, bravely suit up in blue every day, Charles Perry and the State Affairs committee ignored them, instead sending SB4 to the Senate, where Republican Senators–under the influence of wealthy, hyper-partisan lobbyists–then voted to send it to the house. In showing support for this bill, Dan Patrick, Greg Abbott, Charles Perry, and any Senator who voted in favor, were willfully IGNORING the law enforcement that they parrot support for. They were, in fact, endangering the lives of Texas law enforcement officers. Anyone who voices support for or votes in favor of Senate Bill 4–in spite of vocal opposition by the same police they pretend to support–is putting their hypocrisy on full display for all to see.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Daily Resistance at the Capitol

Far-right extremists in the Legislature are waging an all out war on Texas’ rural familiesmothers, people of color, workers, women, retired teachers, and schools. The harm they have done to our communities are not because of just one bill, or even a few. The oppressive state of voting rights, worker rights, women’s rights, health care, education, and basic services for Texans in need is the cumulative effect of thousands of bills passed over decades.

Our Chapter has aligned with a broad coalition of progressive advocates to focus on building the collective power of our movement in Texas and in the state legislature. Whether you can join us for a few hours on one day, or every day, your support matters, and it will make a difference.

Every Monday through Thursday, we’re asking anyone who’s able to join us at the Capitol to register FOR, AGAINST OR NEUTRAL ON EVERY BILL that is scheduled for a hearing on that day.

Here’s how it works:

  1. Sign up to get emailed the next day’s bill list here. The next day’s bill list will go out the night before. 
  2. Every night, you’ll get a bill list with Committee hearing times. Keep in mind that hearings are generally in the morning, with the latest hearings usually starting in the afternoon, at 2:30pm. Generally, you can register your position electronically on every bill or issue at a kiosk, but for some bills that won’t be the case.
  3. Hearings are generally in the Capitol Extension. Sometimes, for some of the more controversial bills, the State Affairs committee will hear testimony on the Senate or House floor. If that’s the case, you can just walk in, ask a clerk where the form to register your position is, and wait your turn to testify. But mainly you’ll be in the Extension. To get to there, Walk through the Rotunda, towards the elevators, and go to E1 or E2. There are also staircases leading down into the extension behind the large staircases that go up to the Senate gallery. Don’t be afraid to ask anyone you see–they’ll tell you how to get to where you need to go. Here’s a map.

If you plan to testify, but are unsure about the process, don’t worry! We’ve got an informative, easy-to-understand how-to here. There’s really nothing to it.

Even if you don’t plan to testify, we hope you’ll get to the capitol to register your opposition or support for the bills we’re tracking. It takes two minutes. You step in, sign onto public wi-fi, navigate to , register your position on a bill, and that’s it. Super easy. NB: The Senate is not as electronically savvy as the House, so you’ll need to register your position on Senate bills at a kiosk.

To help inform positions on bills, we’ve asked numerous progressive organizations to share their legislative agendas, as well as drawn from our own priority bill list. Based on that information, daily bill lists of every bill scheduled for hearing will be emailed and available at the Capitol for advocates to reference.

We’ll be at the capitol as a point of contact. You can reach us most easily via DM on Twitter. The packets will also be posted in the private Facebook Group here.

You can also receive the packets via email by signing up at http://bit.ly/txlegeresistance.

The goal and strategy of the #txlege resistance is to harness and leverage the mobilization power of the various organizations and issues we support to 1) increase our impact on bills that matter most to each our communities and 2) make sure elected officials know we are watching every bill, not just a few.

Now it’s time to let politicians know that we’re paying attention, we’re united and we’re fighting for all Texans, all the time.

Every step of the way our communities are committed to resisting. We will persist and we will participate in democracy to the fullest extent.

Join us at the capitol.

Actions for the week.

 

How to Make a List of Bills to Track in the Texas Legislature

The Texas Legislature only meets for 5 months every 2 years. Due to the condensed time frame, the sheer volume of bills can be dizzying, and covering them and knowing what fresh hell the Texas GOP and the mega-wealthy lobbies behind them are trying to push through can be hard to keep track of.

We’re doing our best to keep the process out in the daylight. First, have a look at our Intro to the Texas Legislature Online here, get familiar with the site, and create an account.

Once you’ve created an account, create a list of bills you’d like to track. Here’s how:

1. Navigate your web browser to the Texas Legislature Online:

http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/

2. Click on “My TLO”.

3. Click “Bill List”.

4. You’ll be prompted to sign in. If you haven’t already, create an account – it’s simple to do, just make sure you use a secure password and that the email account you use has Two-Factor Authentication enabled.

5. Enter a name for your Bill List and a brief description. Then click “Create”. You should then be able to Edit your Bill List.

6. Enter the numeric name of the bill you’d like to track in the left field and a brief description for your own reference (Such as, “HB1261” and “We support-would prohibit charter schools from discrimination against students on basis of their discipline history in admission policy”)

7. Once you’ve entered your desired bills, click “Save”, then click “Run”. You may then download your list of bills as a pdf if you’d like.

And that’s it! You’re up and running. Let us know how it goes in the Comments!

As always, be sure to like our Facebook page and follow us on Twitter.

How to Testify at a Texas Legislative Committee Hearing

In Texas, mega-wealthy industrial lobbies have bought and paid for most of the GOP candidates at every level of our state government. This is a fact. These lobbies install hard-right extremists who vote the way they are instructed to by the lobby think tank, the shadowy industrialists get their rich friends rewarded, and their political arm–the Texas GOP, which exists only to do the bidding of the rich and powerful–stays in power.

But things are changing. And citizen activists terrify these people. Participation is fundamental in taking Texas back. But we can’t win if we don’t show up.

A huge component of showing up entails physically going to the capitol and testifying at a committee hearing. We’ll be doing this a lot.

However, most people have never provided testimony before a Senate or House Committee. Many of us are conditioned to equate things that are new with things that are uncomfortable or scary. Not to worry!

Donna Howard put together a wonderful infographic with steps on how to testify at a Texas Legislative Committee Hearing, and we thought we’d post on this subject and help demystify what this process is like and what you can expect. You can do it! In fact, you must.

For quick reference, you can quickly find upcoming Committee Hearings page at the Texas Legislature Online, under Committees. The most controversial bills are typically sent to the State Affairs Committee in both the House and the Senate.

Before the Hearing

  1. Know when to testify – Track bills, issue areas & committee hearings by signing up for alerts at http://www.capitol.state.tx.us. We keep track of harmful legislation here, and we’ve got a post that walks you through how to use the Texas Legislature Online here if you’d like to make a list of your own bills to track. You should also follow us on Twitter for up-to-the-minute updates about what’s going on with certain bills, and when we’ll be at the capitol to testify, where committee hearings are taking place, etc.
  2. Make sure you can testify – Many committee hearings allow public testimony, but some only allow invited witnesses. Check the hearing notice!
  3. Practice your speech – Testimony is generally limited to 3 minutes. Prepare 2-3 minutes of comments, and run through it a few times.

Getting to the Capitol

  1. Parking near the building – The Capitol’s Visitor Parking Garage is located at 12th & Trinity, but it’s just as easy to park on the street around the capitol. We use an app called ParkX whenever we have to park downtown in Austin–you can just link a debit card to the app and “feed the meter” from your cel phone, without having to go back to your car. There’s metered street parking around the capitol, so you might consider bring quarters. We haven’t had any problem finding a spot on the street lately (even during SXSW), but it’s a good idea to give yourself a good 15 minute cushion before registration begins to find parking.
  2. Getting to the capitol – There are entrances on the north, south, east, and west sides of the capitol. The security checkpoints are there for everyone’s safety; don’t let the state troopers carrying machine guns intimidate you! The troopers are really quite friendly. I mean, it’s Texas y’all.
  3. Find the kiosks – You’ll find electronic kiosks–essentially iPads in a black plastic frame–near each of the committee hearing rooms. This is where you will register to provide testimony. The interface is simple–it’s a web-based form that you enter your name, address, and then you’ll denote whether you’re testifying “On” (neutral), “For”, or “Against” the bill.

    You can even log on to the public Wi-fi and register your position on the bill on your own device, by navigating to http://hwrs.house.state.tx.us/ and just following the instructions on the screen.

  4. You don’t have to give spoken testimony – Remember that the kiosks will give you the option of registering support or opposition without providing testimony. So even if you aren’t planning on staying through the entire Committee hearing, it’s always good to get down to the capitol and register your support for or opposition to a bill.
  5. Get comfortable – Arrive early, but expect to stay late. The sessions are unpredictable. Some hearings are short, but some can be very long.

When It’s Your Turn

  1. How it works – Generally, your name will be called and you’ll be invited to the podium. State your name, who you’re representing, and whether you are for, against, or “on” (neutral) the bill. For example, “My name is Mary Ross, I’m representing myself, and I’m here to testify against the bill.” Simple, we know, but many folks forget this part only to have the committee chair interrupt them.
  2. Be nice – Your testimony can be passionate, but always be respectful.
  3. Be concise – You’ll probably only have 2-3 minutes, so make it count!
  4. Be personal – Tell the Committee how this legislation will impact you, your family, and your friends. Tell your story.
  5. Bring copies – If you’re providing written copies of your testimony (for example, you may have data and supplemental material that backs up the points you’re making in your testimony), the Committee will ask for 20 printed copies. At the beginning of your testimony you can just say “I’ve provided written copies for all the members of the Committee to supplement some of the points I’ll make in my testimony today and I’ll be glad to distribute those” and a page will distribute.
  6. Follow up – Email the committee members to provide additional information. You can find them here: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/Committees/Membership.aspx

You did it!

Thanks to Donna Howard and her team for making this excellent infographic! Here’s the original infographic. Let us know how your testimony goes in the comments below.

New data on the Trump effect in Texas legislative districts

This morning the Texas Tribune’s Patrick Svitek published a fascinating look at how district-by-district data suggests that Texas State legislative districts that traditionally elect GOP representatives all went to Clinton in the 2016 election, based on some newly available statistics.

District-by-district data suggests Dems might be able to go on the offensive in 2018 legislative races

From the article:

The question in those districts, like so many surrounding Trump’s election across the country, is whether the dramatic swings in 2016 were meaningful shifts that could have implications in future elections. That question is particularly pressing for the 11 Texas Republicans now representing districts that voted for Clinton, all of whom are up for re-election in 2018.

What this ultimately means going forward is that it is up to us. Yes, Texas is traditionally thought of as a deep-Red state. In reality, Texas would be more accurately described as a non-voting state.

If Donald Trump’s historical unpopularity doesn’t drive us to raise awareness of how crucial a role the state legislature and Texas state government is going to play is going to play–in gerrymandering Congressional districts, passing racist voter suppression laws, deporting millions of people and herding them into modern day internment camps, and doing away with basic civil liberties–then this will all have been a moot point. We have got to step up at the state level and fight back.

So my challenge for each visitor to this page is: talk to 3 people a day, in person, about voting for in the Texas state elections in 2018. Talk about where your representative stands on the issues.

Now is the time for Texans to demand that our state government listens to us, not wealthy GOP campaign contributors, not lobbyists, and certainly not the Trump administration.

An Immigration Attorney and an Activist Scholar Explain Why SB4 is a Terrible Idea and What You Can Do to Stop It.

Reposted with permission from Indivisible Austin

By Mark Kinzler kinzlerimmigration.com and Shaun Glaze, M.S

girl-flag-croppedImage courtesy Flickr user jvoves https://www.flickr.com/photos/jvoves/138556236

Why the “Sanctuary Cities” bill must be opposed and how to do it effectively

Texas Senate Bill No. 4, or “a bill relating to the enforcement by certain governmental entities of state and federal laws governing immigration and to the duties of law enforcement agencies concerning certain arrested persons” was introduced by Texas state senator Charles Perry (R-Lubbock) and seeks to require law enforcement agencies (LEAs) in Texas to assist and participate in the investigation and determination of the legal status of immigrants who come into their custody. Generally, the job of arresting, detaining, and deporting immigrants is carried out by a branch of the Department of Homeland Security called U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (commonly referred to as “ICE”). SB4, was born from the current storm of anti-immigrant sentiment, with great support from Governor Abbott and Lt. Governor Dan Patrick, who are commonly known to make factually questionable and often clearly disingenuous statements about immigration problems in Texas. SB4 is misguided for several reasons:

  1. Public Safety – Cooperation agreements between ICE and law enforcement agencies have existed for many years. Nevertheless, the agreements are not mandatory, and different law enforcement agencies have been able to choose their level of involvement with ICE officials. Many LEAs throughout the U.S. have chosen to have minimal cooperation with ICE. Though there are several reasons often cited by the LEAs for the choice to provide minimal cooperation, one very common reason is the fact that the LEA’s cooperation with ICE actually damages the ability of the LEA to properly investigate and prosecute crime. In areas with high populations of immigrants, trust between the immigrant community and the LEA is crucial to the ability of the LEA’s fundamental task of protecting and serving the community as a whole. If the immigrant community is aware that the LEA readily cooperates with ICE, or is legally required to assist ICE in its efforts to apprehend deportable persons (a la SB4), members of that community will be fearful of cooperating with the LEA. When members of the community fear having contact with the police, the policy impedes the LEA’s ability to solve local crimes because the effectiveness of that job relies on information from witnesses and statements from victims and other members of the community.
  2. Resources and training of the law enforcement agencies – Local police agencies have an extremely difficult job as it is, and they are often underfunded. Many LEAs do not support cooperation with ICE because it adds another level of investigatory requirement to their already strained workloads and budgets. In order for local officers to properly and lawfully act in a role as an immigration enforcer, the officers would need extensive training in federal and immigration law and would have to increase work hours to comply with the new requirements.
  3. Federal preemption – Under a constitutional principle called federal preemption, state and local authorities are generally not allowed to enforce federal law, particularly when an enforcement procedure is already in place. This is a long-standing principle that has been addressed by several federal courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court. The policy is also reasonable on a practical level because federal authorities are usually in the best position to enforce federal law. Specialization and extensive training is often required to carry out this enforcement due to the complicated nature of the laws being enforced. Also, federal preemption precludes states from enacting their own laws related to federal matters so that overlapping jurisdictions do not end up with conflicting laws on the same matter. Generally, if that happens, the federal law will supersede the state law and the state law will be invalid.