States across the country are pushing back against the Obama administration, challenging the Department of Homeland Securities' (DHS) so-called "Secure Communities" program. The governors of three states — , , and — have now formally sought to end their participation in the controversial program. may soon join them by adopting a law that would limit its entanglement in Secure Communities.
Because Secure Communities (S-Comm) captures the fingerprints of everyone booked into local custody — even those who are wrongfully arrested by local police or whose criminal charges are dropped — the program invites local law enforcement to arrest people whom they suspect are immigrants, often based solely on appearance, simply to bring them into jail and forward their fingerprints to DHS.
Isaura Garcia is a 20-year-old mother living in Los Angeles who endured three years of domestic violence before calling 911, seeking protection from her abusive boyfriend. After the police arrived, they questioned her about her immigration status, then arrested her and sent her fingerprints to federal immigration authorities. Stunned, Isaura fainted. At the hospital, a doctor found bruises on her body and identified her as a victim of domestic violence, and no charges were filed against her.
Please note that by playing this clip You Tube and Google will place a long-term cookie on your computer. Please see on their website and on theirs to learn more. To view the ACLU's privacy statement, click here.
But simply because she had been arrested, Isaura's fingerprints were submitted to immigration officials and she was placed into deportation proceedings. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) only terminated her proceedings after the ACLU of Southern California drew public attention to her case. "I still don't understand why I was arrested," she said, "but had I realized I could be arrested after calling 911 for help and deported, I never would have called."
When it was first rolled out in 2008, S-Comm was sold to the public as a targeted program aimed at deporting "serious criminal offenders." Now, four years in, ICE's own show this is far from the truth. The majority of people deported under the program since its inception — 60 percent — have had only misdemeanor convictions (such as traffic violations or municipal code violations), or have done nothing wrong at all.
There has been widespread opposition to the program from across the political spectrum. With more and more stories like Isaura's, across the country have expressed their opposition to the program, explaining that it undermines public safety by deterring immigrants from contacting local police when they are victims or witnesses of crime. And as , , the and others have spoken out against Secure Communities, the Obama administration has chosen to remain silent.
These individuals and groups have urged the administration to suspend the program pending a thorough review, and denounced DHS's lack of transparency and misinformation about how the program works. In the meantime, however, S-Comm is expanding at breakneck speed to local jurisdictions across the United States, causing massive numbers of noncriminal deportations, discouraging domestic violence and other victims of crimes from seeking police help and abetting racial profiling and abusive police practices.
The Department of Homeland Security Office of the Inspector General has announced that it will launch an internal of S-Comm this summer. Sadly, it comes far too late for many individuals who have already been swept up in this ill-conceived dragnet. Thousands of families and communities across the country have already been unnecessarily broken apart. The public's trust in local law enforcement has been deeply damaged. Now is the moment that the administration must commit to making this right.
Learn more about immigrants' rights: Sign up for breaking news alerts, , and .
Learn More About the Issues on This Page
-
News & CommentaryDec 2024
Civil Liberties
We Need to Know More About State Supreme Court CasesWe Need to Know More About State Supreme Court Cases
State Supreme Courts interpret laws that impact some of the most intimate parts of our lives. Communities have a right to know what’s on the docket. -
Press ReleaseDec 2024
Civil Liberties
New ACLU Report Reveals Most State Supreme Courts Fail to Meet Key Transparency MeasuresNew ACLU Report Reveals Most State Supreme Courts Fail to Meet Key Transparency Measures
NEW YORK — Nearly half of all state supreme courts across the country fail to regularly post new cases they are considering, with only six meeting four key transparency measures already implemented by the U.S. Supreme Court, according to a new report published today by the American Civil Liberties Union. The report identifies significant steps that state supreme courts should take to inform the public about their cases, which have only grown in importance as the federal judiciary has become more hostile to protecting core rights and advocates have turned to state protections and state court litigation in response. Based on an analysis of the practices and policies of the highest courts in each state, including D.C., the report “Scorecard for State Supreme Court Transparency: How Does Your State Stack Up?” ranks each state supreme court in five tiers based on compliance with four key transparency measures. These measures include posting new cases online in a timely manner, providing timely information about legal issues presented by cases, making dockets accessible and free for the public, and making merits briefing accessible and free for the public. “State courts regularly hear — and are the final word on — cases affecting abortion rights, voting rights, criminal justice reform, and more. Yet, in many instances, the highest state courts do not provide meaningful public access to information about cases affecting the rights and liberties of millions of people. We urge state supreme courts to bring more transparency to the critical work they do,” said Julie Murray, co-director of the ACLU’s State Supreme Court Initiative. “In the face of a federal judiciary increasingly unwilling to protect core rights and an incoming administration that threatens to exacerbate that problem, state courts are an important defense for our liberty. They should be leaders in transparency, too,” said Bridget Lavender, Skadden Fellow with the Initiative. The report emphasizes that state courts “play an outsized role” in many parts of the law, but their ability to “guard our liberties depends in significant part on whether those courts adopt transparent processes.” It further highlights that state supreme courts have led the way on enormously consequential decisions in recent years. In particular, some state supreme courts have recognized the right of same sex couples to marry, and did so long before federal courts. They have also declared the death penalty unconstitutional under state law despite contrary federal law, protected access to reproductive health care as a right even as that right was being stripped away at the federal level, and provided more robust protection to people subject to unreasonable searches and seizures. The report urges state supreme courts to take action to improve their transparency practices, taking notes from the courts that have already implemented these measures. It notes that regularly posting new cases and the issues they represent, and providing timely access to dockets and merits briefing allows the public, the press, and the legal community to track cases as they unfold, identify cases with statewide consequences, and understand what’s at stake. -
Press ReleaseNov 2024
National Security
+2 Issues
ACLU Urges House to Kill Bill that Could Give Trump Admin Power to Crush Dissent and Go After Political EnemiesACLU Urges House to Kill Bill that Could Give Trump Admin Power to Crush Dissent and Go After Political Enemies
WASHINGTON — The American Civil Liberties Union strongly urges the House of Representatives to vote NO on H.R. 9495, the Stop Terror-Financing and Tax Penalties on American Hostages Act, which would grant Donald Trump and his handpicked secretary of the Treasury power to investigate and effectively shut down any tax-exempt organization — including news outlets, universities, and civil society groups — by stripping them of tax-exempt status based on an unilateral accusation of wrongdoing. “Passing this bill would hand the incoming Trump administration a dangerous new tool it could use to stifle free speech, target political opponents, and punish disfavored groups,” said Kia Hamadanchy, senior policy counsel at ACLU. “The freedom to dissent without fear of government retribution is a vital part of any well-functioning democracy, which is why Congress must block H.R. 9495 before it’s too late.” While there is a 90-day “cure” period in which a designated nonprofit can mount a defense, it is a mere illusion of due process. The government may deny organizations its reasons and evidence against them, leaving the nonprofit unable to rebut allegations. This means that a nonprofit could be left entirely in the dark about what conduct the government believes qualifies as "support," making it virtually impossible to clear its name. Last month, the ACLU and a diverse array of over 130 other tax-exempt organizations — including human rights, reproductive health, and immigrants’ rights groups — wrote to Congress urging them to vote no. The letter also explains that the groups do not oppose the provisions in H.R. 9495 that relate to preventing the IRS from imposing fines and penalties on hostages while they are held abroad. Indeed, these provisions have already passed the Senate on their own, and if the House of Representatives were to pass a version of this bill that did not include the text of H.R. 6408, it could be sent immediately to President Biden for his signature. -
News & CommentaryNov 2024
Civil Liberties
Donald Trump Will Return to the White House in January. The ACLU is Ready.Donald Trump Will Return to the White House in January. The ACLU is Ready.
Starting in 2016, the ACLU filed more than 400 legal actions against Trump and his administration. As Trump returns to the White House, we’re ready to return to the courts and Congress to fight for our civil liberties.