In a speech to the California Peace Officers' Association’s
Legislative Day, Attorney General Jeff Sessions today announced that the
Justice Department has filed a legal action against the State of California,
Governor of California Jerry Brown, and Attorney General of California Xavier
Becerra, seeking both declaratory and injunctive relief based upon the
enactment and implementation of certain provisions of three California
laws—Assembly Bill 450 (AB 450); Senate Bill 54 (SB 54); and Assembly Bill 103
(AB 103)—which intentionally obstruct and discriminate against the enforcement
of federal immigration law. The complaint contends that the laws in question
are preempted by federal law and impermissibly target the Federal Government,
and therefore violate the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution.
As a result, the Justice Department is seeking to permanently enjoin these
state statutes, which are contrary to federal law and interfere with federal
immigration authorities’ ability to carry out their lawful duties. In addition,
the Justice Department is continuing to review other related California
enactments.
The complaint, accompanying motion for a preliminary
injunction, and declarations from Department of Homeland Security and
Department of State officials—filed last evening in the Eastern District of
California—spell out in detail the extent to which each of these laws have
interfered, and will continue to interfere, with federal law enforcement
efforts.
AB 450 prohibits private employers from voluntarily
cooperating with federal immigration officials—including officials conducting
worksite enforcement efforts and other enforcement operations. It also requires
that private employers notify employees in advance of a potential worksite
enforcement inspection—despite clear federal law that has been on the books for
approximately three decades that has no such requirements. An April 22, 2017,
report on AB 450 compiled by the California State Assembly’s Committee on
Judiciary states that the law is designed to frustrate “an expected increase in
federal immigration enforcement actions.” California has demonstrated its
intent to enforce this law: on Jan. 18, 2018, California Attorney General
Becerra issued a warning to employers in the state that his office would
“prosecute those who violate [AB 450] by voluntarily cooperating with
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) efforts.” Additionally, failure to
comply with AB 450 could result in a fine for the business owner ranging from
$2,000-$10,000. California employers are thus caught between what many may feel
is a civic duty to cooperate with the enforcement of federal law, and a state
government that penalizes such lawful cooperation.
SB 54 restricts state and local law enforcement officials
from providing information to federal immigration authorities about the release
date of removable criminal aliens who are in their custody. These criminal
aliens are subject to removal from the United States under federal immigration
law, and SB 54 interferes with federal immigration authorities’ ability to
carry out their responsibilities under federal law. SB 54 also violates 8 USC
1373, a law enacted by Congress, which promotes information sharing related to
immigration enforcement. The state law also prohibits the actual transfer of
criminal aliens to federal custody, which creates a dangerous operating
environment for ICE agents executing arrests in non-custodial settings. In a
declaration provided to the Court, ICE Deputy Director Thomas Homan states that
these “at-large arrests. . .unquestionably involve a greater possibility of the
use of force or violence by the target . . . and have greater access to
weapons, exposing officers, the public, and the alien to greater risk of harm.”
Remarkably, with this law California attempts to shield from
federal law enforcement removable criminal aliens who have committed crimes in
the state of California and across the country. In doing so, California is
releasing onto its streets those removable criminal aliens who have already
shown a willingness to engage in criminal activity—as evidenced by their state
or local detention for violating state law—and who therefore are most likely to
commit crimes in the future.
AB 103 imposes a state-run inspection and review scheme of
the federal detention of aliens held in facilities pursuant to federal
contracts. This includes review of immigration processes and the circumstances
in which aliens were apprehended, and also requires access to privileged
federal records that are under ICE’s control. With this law, California is
trying to regulate federal immigration detention, which it cannot do under the
Constitution. California does not impose such an inspection and review scheme
on other similar detention facilities that do not house civil immigration
detainees—in other words, this is a special review regime that applies only to
facilities that house civil immigration detainees. This different treatment
shows that California is seeking to regulate the federal government, which is
not permitted under well-established Supreme Court precedent.
“The Department of Justice and the Trump Administration are
going to fight these unjust, unfair, and unconstitutional policies that have
been imposed on you,” Attorney General Jeff Sessions today told law enforcement
officers attending the California Peace Officers Association’s 26th Annual Law
Enforcement Legislative Day, referencing AB 450, SB 54, and AB 103. “We are
fighting to make your jobs safer and to help you reduce crime in America. And I
believe that we are going to win.”
“Our duty at the Department of Homeland Security is to
enforce and uphold the nation’s security laws as passed by the U.S. Congress
and signed by the President,” said Secretary Kirstjen M. Nielsen for the
Department of Homeland Security.
“California has chosen to purposefully contradict the will and
responsibility of the Congress to protect our homeland. I appreciate the
efforts of Attorney General Jeff Sessions and the Department of Justice to
uphold the rule of law and protect American communities.”
No comments:
Post a Comment