News reports surfaced last week that a fourteen-year-old girl from Dallas, an American citizen who did not speak a word of Spanish, was deported to Colombia.
The reports say Jakadrien Turner gave an assumed name -- we don't know why -- that matched a name in a Secure Communities database, and that Immigration and Customs Enforcement took her fingerprints but did not confirm her identity.
How many cases like this will it take before the Department of Homeland Security calls a time out and fixes the serious flaws in its Secure Communities program? Turner is not the first American citizen to have been mistakenly detained as part of the program -- and it has other egregious problems.
Combine it with racial profiling on the local level, for example, and you have a toxic mix: An undocumented immigrant could be wrongfully arrested, but once his name is run through an immigration database, he's caught in this broken system.
Such excessive zeal is not theoretical. Last month the Department of Justice (DOJ) issued a report on major civil rights abuses by the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office (MCSO) in Arizona.
In short, the Justice Department said that the MCSO is a top destination for racial profiling (of Latinos); unlawful stops, detentions and arrests (of Latinos); and unlawful retaliation against people "who complain about or criticize MCSO's policies or practices" (no mention of Latinos, but we suspect that at least a few complained).
The Justice Department had Sheriff Joe Arpaio's office under its microscope for more than three years, starting under the Bush Administration. This was not a casual review.
Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Janet Napolitano responded to the DOJ's findings by restricting the office's access to the Secure Communities program. "Discrimination undermines law enforcement and erodes the public trust," Napolitano said in a statement. "DHS will not be a party to such practices."
Hear, hear! The problem is that Secure Communities opens the door to similar civil rights violations in a lot of places. Given that the DOJ thinks Arizona, Alabama, South Carolina and Utah all have passed unconstitutional immigration enforcement laws, why does DHS allow law enforcement in these states to operate Secure Communities?
And why should it be planned for implementation in East Haven, Conn., where a two-year Justice Department investigation also uncovered racial profiling? (The report is dated December 19, a mere four days after the department slammed Maricopa County. Busy month.)
Secretary Napolitano has her work cut out for her if she truly wants her department to sidestep discriminatory practices and restore an ounce of credibility to Secure Communities.
She must halt the program in the aforementioned states, as well as in localities where the Justice Department has found discriminatory policing. And she has to suspend the program nationwide until reforms and safeguards are put in place. Finally, her department must honor local decisions regarding whether and how to participate.
We have told her as much in a letter the National Immigration Forum and the AFL-CIO sent her earlier this month. Our two organizations resigned from DHS's Task Force on Secure Communities in September, precisely because its recommendations, though constructive, did not adequately address the problems that make Secure Communities counterproductive to effective local policing and public safety.
As former members of the Task Force, we urge Secretary Napolitano to take these necessary steps. Without them, Secure Communities will never meet its goal of promoting public safety by identifying and removing people who pose a real threat. Worse, it will remain open to abuses and will continue to erode trust in local law enforcement.
Not to mention the occasional detention and even deportation of American citizens.
Follow Ali Noorani on Twitter: www.twitter.com/ImmPolitic
Arturo Venegas, Jr.: The Difference in Police Leadership on Immigration and Civil Rights
Timothy J. Steigenga and Marie Friedmann Marquardt: Why We Wrote Living "Illegal"
Bennett L. Gershman: How Immigration Courts Contaminate American Justice
Bill Quigley: Migrants' Rights Are Human Rights! Take Local Police Out of Immigration Enforcement
Secure Communities - U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
Secure Communities Task Force Releases Recommendations, Five ...
New Secure Communities Study Reveals Troubling Data | Lost in ...
Time out? The author sounds like he's simply against enforcement like Secure Communities and if there were a time out, would never support a "time in" no matter how perfect it could be made. It begs the question: Has there ever been a form of enforcement perfect enough for these bad faith critics not to oppose? I'm still waiting for one.
"this broken system"
What is Ali's preferred system then? Let me guess: comprehensive immigration reform. Enforcement is supposedly part of "comprehensive immigration reform" but when was the last time you heard someone like Ali have anything positive to say about any form of immigration law enforcement? If they oppose it all, one can conclude that the only thing that would make them happy would be unlimited immigration, i.e., "open borders". The "right" of the immigrant is to stay--for as many of them who show up, invited or not. Zero accountability to law which is inherent to the very sovereignty of a nation. If you oppose every form of holding people accountable to immigration law, it's the same as saying that we do not have the right to control who resides here. Whatever enforcement included in "comprehensive immigration reform" will immediately be fought tooth and nail by its supposed proponents. Thus, the fact is that Ali Noorani and his ilk WANT the system to be broken forever if that system contains a limit.
In 2012, I'll be voting for anybody, except Obama, even Paul or Alfred E. Newman.
“notwithstanding any other provision of Federal, State, or local law,” no state or local entity may be prohibited or restricted from reporting information to federal authorities. These laws expressly forbids restraints on communications with federal officials, including the sharing of information relating to peoples illegal immigration status, thereby targeting “don’t tell” sanctuary policies that banned local cooperation with federal authorities.
The real victims, whose civil rights were violated, because Secure Communities Program was not implemented
Far, far more than just one . . . . . . .
http://www.ojjpac.org/memorial.asp
Precisely how is suspending the entire Secure Communities program nationwide going to meet this goal? What specific measures do the authors suggest to meet this goal? None, which strongly reveals this is not a goal they share.
You have a sworn duty to uphold the laws of this nation. That means that if a foreign national is here without proper authorization then that person is an illegal alien. Unless that foreign national came here seeking asylum he or she must be promptly repatriated to their home country. Thanks to technological advances we now have the ability to detect the presence of unlawful aliens within our sovereign jurisdiction much more effectively. This should be a cause for celebration - after all, who in their right mind wants to see our communities and attendant services overrun by people who flout the law? Of course, there are people in our country who do not respect the law nor understand its basis. Please disregard the handwringing theatrics of these witless clowns and DO YOUR JOB. Thank you.