ACLU suit targets Sheriff's Department

[ferrous]

Sonoma County agency accused of unlawful detention, profiling of illegal immigration suspects

By CLARK MASON
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT

Published: Saturday, September 6, 2008 at 4:30 a.m.
Last Modified: Saturday, September 6, 2008 at 3:42 a.m.

A lawsuit filed Friday in federal court accuses the Sonoma County Sheriff's Department of unlawful detentions and racial profiling of Latinos suspected of being undocumented immigrants.

Attorneys for the American Civil Liberties Union and the Committee for Immigrant Rights of Sonoma County say the Sheriff's Department collaborates with federal immigration officials to stop and search people who appear to be Latino, interrogate them about their immigration status and jail them without legal basis.

"I would say that's all untrue," Sheriff Bill Cogbill responded Friday, though he had not yet seen a copy of the lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court.

State law does not permit local sheriffs and police to enforce immigration law. But the lawsuit cites several recent cases in which deputies allegedly arrested people suspected of violating civil immigration law and placed them in the \county jail without a warrant or any criminal basis for the arrest.

"When local police act as immigration agents, they infringe on the fundamental rights of residents and create a climate of suspicion and fear that undermines public trust and public safety," said Julia Harumi Mass, the ACLU staff attorney who filed the lawsuit naming the Sheriff's Department, the Department of Homeland Security and the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE.

The Sheriff's Department acknowledges that it cooperates with ICE in a limited capacity, including detaining undocumented immigrants who have committed or are suspected of committing a crime, especially if it's violent or gang-related.

If there is a criminal warrant or immigration detainer on someone, the Sheriff's Department also assists in arresting those people.

"We're not going on a witch hunt, racial profiling," Cogbill said. "For those committing crimes and involved in gangs and other violent crimes, using ICE is a way to take them out of the community. It's good public safety," he said.

www1.pressdemocrat.com/article/20080906/NEWS/809060374/1350&title=ACLU_suit_targets_Sheriff_s_Department
__________________________

I didn't know that it was against the law in this state for law enforcement agencies to enforce immigration laws or to cooperate with the IEC (Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement.)

[The New Guy]

the American Criminal Liberties Union rides again!

[JustMyOpinion]

It SEEMS like it is getting more and more difficult to enforce immingration laws. I just read this tidbit on the Marin IJ online site:

Hospital chided for reporting illegal applicant
By ANABELLE GARAY Associated Press Writer
Article Launched: 09/01/2008 01:21:25 AM PDT


CARROLLTON, Texas—Maria Martinez' attempt to land a cafeteria job at a suburban Dallas hospital got her arrested, jailed and deported.
She did use a counterfeit social security on her application to Trinity Medical Center, but her relatives and supporters wonder whether the hospital overreacted by calling the police.

During yet another year marked by several high profile immigration raids targeting both undocumented workers and the companies who hire them, the Martinez case raises questions about what employers can or should do if they discover an applicant is not authorized to work legally in the U.S.

A spokeswoman for the medical center here contends the hospital was simply following policy and has a responsibility to report criminal activity, including possible identity theft.

It may be hospital policy, but employers aren't required to report a worker or applicant suspected of being in the U.S. illegally, say immigration attorneys and enforcement officials.

"For an employer to go ahead and take it upon themselves ... to report that is unusual," said immigration attorney Kathleen Walker. "There's no obligation on my part to go call law enforcement."

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement spokesman Carl Rusnok agreed, saying employers and local police typically don't have the training needed to determine whether someone is in the country illegally.

Carrollton's mayor has emphasized that one of his priorities is to rid the city of illegal immigrants. The neighboring suburb of Farmers Branch has unsuccessfully tried to prohibit landlords from renting houses and apartments to tenants who cannot prove they are in the U.S. legally.

But hospital spokeswoman Susan Watson said the decision to report Martinez had nothing to do with the immigration debate in suburban Dallas. The hospital reported what it considered a crime, she said.

"Regardless of whether they were an illegal alien, legal immigrant or an American citizen, it still wouldn't have mattered. They still would have been reported," she said.

Watson said it was the first time in at least two years that the hospital reported a possible crime involving a worker or applicant to police. But officials are always on alert because many employees have access to patients' medical records and other private information, she said.

Immigration attorneys and advocates are concerned that many employers have become overly cautious, to the point that they might be bending or breaking the law.

"When people are being prescreened before a decision to hire is being made, then you could have exposure to discrimination charges," said Walker, an El Paso lawyer and former president of the American Immigration Lawyers Association.

Recent workplace raids around the country have increasingly led to prosecuting unauthorized workers for identity theft and use of someone else's social security number. But those prosecutions have stemmed from federal investigations into workers at specific companies, not calls from an employer to local police.

Still, such raids have left employers edgy, said Muzaffar Chishti, director of the Migration Policy Institute at New York University School of Law.

"I think employers are beginning to feel the pinch and in many cases I think they are trying not only to be sort of extra cautious but ... to be pre-emptive," said Chishti. "What's troubling is that employers have taken it upon themselves the job of ascertaining whether a crime has been committed."

Martinez, a single mother of a 3-year-old son and a teenage daughter, acknowledged buying the social security card for $110 at a Wal-Mart., according to police records. She also had a second social security card and two counterfeit cards stating she was a legal permanent resident.

She had planned to fight the state charge, but after being held in jail for nearly three weeks, she agreed to be deported to Mexico. Her son joined her there.

"She told me to please forgive her," said Martinez' 19-year-old daughter, who spoke on condition of anonymity because she also is in the U.S. illegally. "She told me she wasn't strong enough to fight."


The comment section is always fun to read.
Source:

www.marinij.com/ci_10355244

[subdjoe]

Now, now, Ferrous, you KNOW that this is a Santuary State where we don't have to follow federal law, don't you?

[subdjoe]

Good post, JMO. Employeres are in a real bind. If they hire them, they are breaking the law. If they don't hire them, they are bigoted racists. If they turn them in for breaking the law, they are overstepping their duty and/or authority.

This trend of demonizing people or business for doing thier civic duty is yet one more step in the backers of the one world government movement to remove power and rights from the individual and concentrate all power with the State.

[The Big Dog]

It's not that it is specifically against the law. State law simply does not allow for it. Detainment for investigation of immigration offenses is not in the enumerated powers of arrest of a California peace officer.

Having said that, it used to be that if a crime was committed and the actor was in custody you could book them with an immigration hold and the Border Patrol might eventually come out and get them. Sanctuary policies have pretty much eliminated that.

[Len]

Am befuddled. Does "sanctuary policy" emanate from the local county folks? Like D.A. or Supervisor? Or Chief of Police? Or who? And is there any public comment allowed, as in most public changes to local codes?
I mean, how does it come down? Bugs up the nose? Or "see the light" phenomena?
So who "proclaims" it? Like Newsome in S.F.? And then "make it so" happens?
How about Sonoma, just to get personal! Has someone proclaimed this their kingdom and law?
And if so, who, by name OR title.
Curious folks just want answers.

[bolverk]

The ACLU and Sanctuary Laws infringe on the fundamental rights of residents and create a climate of suspicion and fear that undermines public trust and public safety. When violent street gangs, illegal day workers and illegal immigrants get better protection from the law then the citizens, no one trusts their leaders to do the right thing. This creates a atmospher of distrust and a feeling that people must take the law into their own hands, in order to protect what is rightfully theirs.

[bolverk]

How was that for a twist on the ACLU's arguement?

[ferrous]

Bolverk writes; "This creates a atmospher of distrust and a feeling that people must take the law into their own hands, in order to protect what is rightfully theirs."

What about protecting the jobs that are rightfully ours?

Word from the liberal left is that they take the jobs that Americans workers don't want.

I was at a job site where a contractor was remodeling a doctor’s office. There were six workers on the job, all of them young Hispanics that were only speaking in Spanish. The crew leader (Hispanic) would converse with me in English.

Seems that this cheap labor has spilled out of the fields and is now taking up a good number of the construction jobs.

The same jobs that American workers have always prized.

The same jobs that power this country and provide for the working class to support our families and protect our future.

[The Big Dog]

And Ferrous, as usual, raises exactly the heart of the matter.

Immigrant labor, legal or otherwise, has flooded many industries. Food service, skilled trades, agriculture and throughout the so called "service industries" in general. The net effect is not solely that jobs are being taken out of the hands of American workers. I, for one, put myself through school doing a series of different jobs... pounding nails, framing foundations and walls, pouring concrete, driving a delivery truck. I would wager that the average American college kid today couldn't do that.

But the corrolary effect is that the prevailing wages for all of these various jobs has fallen. In some cases quite drastically. So it becomes a double edged sword. Not only does the job market shrink for the American worker, the wages for the work aren't enough for him to live above the table.

[bolverk]

Ah, the Democratic way. Cheap labor and cheap votes.