Immigration Enforcement Articles
Below are articles are written by immigration enforcement activists.
Want to submit more relevant documents/articles to this website? Click here.
Published by Immigration Policy Center/American Immigration Council:
The 287(g) Program: A Flawed and Obsolete Method of Immigration Enforcement (2012)
287(g) results in racial profiling and is a drain on local taxpayer money. There are very few captures of violent offenders under it, and it hinders community policing. There is also a lack sufficient federal oversight.
Published by American Immigration Council:
The 287(g) Program: An Overview (2017)
https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/287g-program-immigration
Program nets few criminals; results in racial profiling; and is expensive to localities.
Published by Migration Policy Institute:
A Program in Flux: New Priorities and Implementation Challenges for 287(g) (2010)
How local law enforcement agencies and ICE “operationalize” the formal terms of their MOAs determine whether they threaten civil rights protections.
Delegation and Divergence: A Study of 287(g) State and Local Immigration Enforcement (2011)
https://www.migrationpolicy.org/pubs/287g-divergence.pdf
The statutory language of section 287(g), the Obama administration’s guidelines, and ICE’s implementation practices allow the 287(g) Program to operate in fundamentally different ways across the country. Study finds that 287(g) Program has more significant negative impact on immigrant communities when a jurisdiction uses a universal model, and that traffic offenders comprise a large proportion of persons channeled through the program in those areas.
Published by ACLU:
The Policies and Politics of Local Immigration Enforcement Laws, by North Carolina ACLU and University of North Carolina Immigration and Human Rights Policy Clinic (2009)
The primary function of local law enforcement is to protect local communities from crime. 287(g) is not the right solution because it: (1) Marginalizes an already vulnerable population by encouraging/tolerating racial profiling, which results in harassment and isolation of the Hispanic community; (2) causes fear of law enforcement, such that immigrant communities refrain from reporting crimes, thereby compromising public safety; (3) causes economic devastation for already struggling localities, as immigrants flee and cause a loss of profits for local businesses; and (4) leads to violations of civil liberties and legal protections, thereby paving the way for future encroachments into basic fundamental freedoms. Local law enforcement may violate federal law by not complying with: (1) equal protection laws, by engaging in racial profiling and harassment on the basis of race; (2) the Civil Rights Act of 1964, by discriminating against individuals based on their race, color, or ethnicity; (3) Department of Justice Guidelines which were developed “for Federal officials to ensure an end to racial profiling in law enforcement”; (4) Federal criminal procedure law, by rushing undocumented immigrants through the system; and (5) International treaty law, by failing to timely communicate with consular officers from detainees’ countries of origin as required by Article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. Wrongful immigration determination, detention, and deportation may result from local officers lacking expertise in complex immigration law. MOAs are often characterized by: (1) vagueness, (2) lack of notice and information about the right to file a complaint, (3) conflicts of interest in reviewing a complaint, and (4) unclear complaint resolution procedures.
Terror and Isolation in Cobb: How Unchecked Police Power under 287(g) has Torn Families Apart and Threatened Public Safety, by ACLU Georgia (2009)
287(g) agreements undermine police work because immigrant communities, who are fearful of being deported, hesitate to report crime. The Major Cities Chiefs Association and the Police Foundation have both found that community policing efforts are harmed by participation in 287(g) programs. Law enforcement agencies may reallocate limited resources towards nonviolent crimes, like driving without a license, and may thus have little money left over for combating violent crimes. There are well-documented instances of racial profiling under 287(g), and there is no meaningful check in place to ensure that local law enforcement do not abuse the program by intimidating and racially profiling immigrant communities.
ICE should end, not expand agreements with local and state law enforcement, says ACLU (2009)
287(g) lacks oversight, monitoring, or accountability mechanisms to address racial profiling and other civil rights violations.
Published by the Police Foundation:
The Role of Police: Striking a Balance between Immigration Enforcement and Civil Liberties (2009)
https://www.policinginstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/The-Role-of-Local-Police-Narrative.pdf
Report on opinions of a series of focus groups across the country. The general consensus was that 287(g) inhibits community policing; the costs of the program outweigh its benefits; and that local law enforcement agencies should put pressure on federal government to improve border security. The groups were not in favor of 287(g) unless it applies only for criminal acts.
Published by NCLR (National Council of La Raza):
The Impact of Section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act on the Latino Community (2010)
https://unidosus.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/287g_issuebrief_pubstore.pdf
Elevated racial and ethnic profiling by law enforcement has created a threatening environment for all Latinos. Academic and advocacy groups that have tracked 287(g)-related incidents, showing that the majority of those arrested and deported under 287(g) were not the violent criminals or terrorists. The GAO found significant problems and gaps in oversight and management of the 287(g) program by ICE. OIG found that training programs for 287(g) officers did not prepare them completely for immigration enforcement. Further, this training does not include any requirement of language training or language competency. In a survey of 54 police chiefs, deputies, and sheriffs conducted by the Police Foundation, only nine offices said that the 287(g) program helped fight crime. The majority agreed that 287(g) agreements detract from more urgent police work. They also believed that 287(g) agreements often severely hinder the ability of police to earn the trust required to implement effective community policing.
Published by Reuters:
Police in Trump-supporting towns aid immigration officials in crackdown (2017)
Since Trump took office, 29 police departments have joined 287(g) according to the ICE. Three-quarters of the agencies that have already signed 287(g) agreements or are interested in doing so are in counties that voted for Trump in 2016, according to a Reuters analysis of electoral data.
Published by Major Cities Chiefs:
M.C.C. Immigration Committee Recommendations (2006)
https://www.houstontx.gov/police/pdfs/mcc_position.pdf
(1) Without assurances that local police interaction would not result in purely civil immigration enforcement action, the trust, communication and cooperation from the immigrant community would disappear. (2) Calls for local police agencies to enforce immigration come with no clear statement or guarantee to provide adequate federal funding. (3) Local agencies fear that the call for local enforcement of immigration laws signals the beginning of a trend towards local police agencies being asked to enter other areas of federal enforcement. (4) Local police agencies are ill equipped in terms of training, experience and resources to delve into the complicated area of immigration enforcement. (5) Immigration civil detainers do not fall within the clear criminal enforcement authority of local police agencies and thus lay a trap for unwary officers who believe them to be valid criminal warrants or detainers. (6) Because local agencies lack clear authority to enforce immigration laws, are limited in their ability to arrest without a warrant, are prohibited from racial profiling, and lack training and experience to enforce complex federal immigration laws, it is more likely that local police agencies will face the risk of civil litigation if they chose to enforce federal immigration laws.
Published in Journal on Migration and Human Security:
Local Immigration Enforcement and Arrests of the Hispanic Population (2017)
https://cmsny.org/publications/jmhs-local-enforcement-hispanic-pop/
This is an analysis of the effects of implementing 287(g) in the Sheriff’s Office in Frederick County, Maryland. The report found that overall arrests of Hispanics fell, suggesting that the Hispanic population started avoiding police interaction. The study also found data suggesting that that the Sheriff’s office redirected its attention to arrests of Hispanics after implementation of 287(g). Interesting note: 15 studies confirm that cities with more immigrants have lower crime rates.
Published by Justice Strategies:
Local Democracy on ICE: Why State and Local Governments have no Business in Federal Immigration Law Enforcement (2009)
Race, not crime, has propelled growth of 287(g). Local law enforcement is ill-equipped to enforce complex immigration law. 287(g) sets up states and localities to bail out the federal government, because it is unfunded. Civil and criminal law enforcement are incompatible enterprises; 287(g) rests on the faulty assumption that civil immigration enforcement can be seamlessly absorbed into the crime-control mission shared by criminal justice agencies. ICE has failed to manage the program adequately.
Published by the Center for American Progress:
The Negative Consequences of Entangling Local Policing and Immigration Enforcement (2017)
Strain on funds: Under the 287(g) program, participating jurisdictions perform federal immigration enforcement functions largely at their own expense. Community policing: A study found that Latinos, whether citizens or noncitizens, are “less likely to volunteer information about crimes because they fear getting caught in the web of immigration enforcement themselves or bringing unwanted attention to their family or friends.” The study also found that 70 percent of unauthorized immigrants and 44 percent of Latinos are less likely to communicate with law enforcement if they believe officers will question their immigration status or that of people they know. Crime effect: Research finds that, on average, there are 35.5 fewer crimes per 10,000 people in sanctuary counties than in non-sanctuary counties. Summary of effects: Major Cities Chiefs Association (MCCA) cites major areas of concern with linking local law enforcement with immigration enforcement, including (1) undermined community trust, (2) lack of resources, and (3) overly complex and time-consuming training that detracts from the public safety mission.
Published by the National Network for Immigrant and Refugee Rights (NNIRR):
Over-Raided, Under Seige: U.S. Immigration Laws and Enforcement Destroy the Rights of Immigrants (2008)
https://nnirr.org/downloads/undersiege_web.pdf
287(g) encourages abuse of immigrants at the hands of unscrupulous police, employers, hate groups, and others who believe that immigrants will not report crimes to avoid detection or deportation.
Published by the Cato Institute:
Trump Looking to Local Police for Immigration Enforcement (2017)
https://www.cato.org/blog/trump-looking-local-police-immigration-enforcement
Police Foundation and International Association of Police Chiefs both say that cooperation of illegal aliens is critical to crime solving, and that 287(g) impedes community policing
Published in Citylab:
The Rise of Anti-Sanctuary Cities (2017).
https://www.citylab.com/equity/2017/03/the-rise-of-anti-sanctuary-cities/517377/
Describes high costs of 287(g) in local communities, including salaries to implement the program, racial profiling litigation defense footed by taxpayers, increased 911 response times, unserved felony warrants, and increase in violent crime.
Published on CNN Money:
ICE pledges immigration crackdown on businesses. Here’s what it looks like (2018)
http://money.cnn.com/2018/01/15/news/economy/ice-immigration-work-site-crackdown/index.html
Increase in I-9 enforcement in 2018; negative impact on familes.
Other:
Letter to the President dated August 25, 2009, written by a large number of organizations against 287(g).
https://www.acluaz.org/sites/default/files/documents/LETTER_TO_PRESIDENT_20090825133229.pdf
Racial profiling abuses by local law enforcement agencies working through 287(g) have compromised public safety, while doing nothing to solve the illegal immigration issue.