Agenda - 01-21-2010 - 3b - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

17 criminal aliens for enforcement actions and removal based on their threat to public safety. According to the September 1, 2009, Secure Communities Fact Sheet: ICE will focus its efforts on the most dangerous criminal aliens currently charged with, or previously convicted of, the most serious criminal offenses. ICE will give priority to those offenses including, crimes involving national security, homicide, kidnapping, assault, robbery, sex offenses, and narcotics violations carrying sentences of more than one year.'-' However, the Memorandum of Agreement between ICE and state identification bureaus, as well as ICE's Secure Communities Standard Operating Procedures, continue to refer to the three priority levels. 16 These documents also list the crimes included in each level. Transform: Through Secure Communities, ICE hopes to transform "the way the federal government cooperates with state and local law enforcement agencies to identify, detain, and remove all criminal aliens held in custody," and thus optimize capacity and efficiency. Unlike other ICE -local partnerships, Secure Communities gives ICE a technological, not physical, presence in prisons and jails. No Memoranda of Agreement (MOAs) with local law- enforcement agencies are required, and no local law - enforcement agents are deputized to enforce immigration laws through Secure Communities. However, MOAs between DHS and state identification bureaus are necessary. Local jails must have digital fingerprint equipment in order to participate in the program. Typically, local law- enforcement agencies do not submit fingerprints directly to federal databases (such as FBI databases), but do so through their state identification bureaus. According to Rep. Price: Secure Communities offers a productive approach for Federal immigration agents to work closely with State and local law enforcement while distinguishing the traditional Federal role of enforcing immigration law from the local role of prosecuting criminal violations. We have heard from many law enforcement and community groups about the importance of keeping a bright line between immigration enforcement and local community policing, and the Secure Communities program does just that." While some may claim that Secure Communities is an improvement over other federal -local partnerships such as the 287(8) program,18 this new program still faces many of the same criticisms and problems as 287(g). Thus, to understand Secure Communities, we must first review its predecessor, the 287(8) program. Precursor to Secure Communities: The 287(g) Program Section 133 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA), also known as section 287(8) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), created a new method to engage state and local police in the enforcement of federal immigration law. Section 287(8) allows the Secretary of Homeland Security to enter into agreements that delegate immigration powers to local police, but only through negotiated agreements that are documented in MOAs.19 While there is strong support in some sectors for the 287(g) program, there has also been strong opposition from across the political spectrum: advocates for victims of domestic abuse, faith -based organizations, conservatives, immigrant- rights groups, elected officials, and law- enforcement officials. Criticism generally falls into three categories: the increased potential for costly mistakes and discrimination, the strain on already - limited police resources, and the harmful impact on community relations and community policing. 8