Nine local governments that the Department of Justice has highlighted as possible “sanctuary” jurisdictions have a month to prove that their local policies don’t violate federal law.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions has threatened to cancel almost $300 million in federal grants to the jurisdictions on the Justice Department’s list, if they are in fact operating as sanctuaries from federal immigration enforcement.
The fuzzy definition of the term “sanctuary” has been equally frustrating to people for and against protections for undocumented people. That’s become a problem as some states, and President Donald Trump, have tried to outlaw sanctuary cities.
In his ruling blocking Trump’s executive order in April, U.S. District Judge William Orrick noted that federal law “does not define ‘sanctuary jurisdiction,’ ” and “the term is not defined anywhere in the Executive Order.”
Sessions cleared up some of that confusion on May 22, announcing that he’d settled on a new working definition for the term: “For purposes of enforcing the Executive Order, the term ‘sanctuary jurisdiction’ will refer only to jurisdictions that ‘willfully refuse to comply with 8 U.S.C. 1373.’ ”
That’s the law that says local governments can’t stop police from sharing an individual’s status with immigration officials.
Some local law enforcement agencies have approved policies against holding a person in the local jail at the request of immigration officers via a detainer request. The memo seemed to acknowledge that such requests are only voluntary – though Sessions’ budget proposal, also issued last week, would change that.
In April, the Justice Department sent letters to nine jurisdictions it suspected were violating section 1373, asking them to prove that their policies weren’t against the law, or risk losing their federal grants. The department asked for a response from the jurisdictions by June 30.
(They are Chicago, New Orleans, New York and Philadelphia; Clark County, Nev., Cook County, Ill., Miami-Dade County, Fla., and Milwaukee County, Wis.; and the state of California.)
Most of the nine have policies against cooperating with detainer requests, but don’t limit officers’ abilities to “communicate” with immigration enforcement agents.
Justice Department spokesman Ian Prior told Reveal from The Center for Investigative Reporting that all nine jurisdictions are expected to prove they’re complying with the law by the end of next month.
“The memo does not impact the requirement to certify compliance with 1373 – in fact, it reaffirms it,” Prior wrote.
California’s Board of State and Community Corrections will consider its response during a meeting on June 8. “We believe that we’re in compliance,” spokeswoman Tracie Cone said.
Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department spokesman Jay Rivera said his department is already in the clear. Days after the Justice Department issued the letters, he said, Las Vegas Sheriff Joseph Lombardo made his case to Sessions during a meeting with other local leaders.
“As a result of that meeting, we were removed from that list,” Rivera said.
Cook County bars employees from “responding to ICE inquiries or communicating with ICE regarding individuals’ incarceration status or release dates while on duty.” That policy seems to tread as close as any on the list to section 1373, but spokesman Frank Shuftan said the county believes it’s in line with federal law.
Even Miami-Dade County – where Mayor Carlos Gimenez already responded to Trump’s order by rolling back a policy against detainer requests in February – is expected to send a letter proving its compliance.
Only one jurisdiction has apparently replied to DOJ’s inquiry so far.
On the day of his meeting with Sessions, New Orleans Mayor Mitch Landrieu sent a letter and an accompanying legal opinion explaining why he believes his city is in the clear. For one thing, he wrote, Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials helped draft its policy, so “it is curious as to why last week New Orleans was one of nine locales targeted by the Department of Justice.”
Patrick Michels can be reached at pmichels@revealnews.org. Follow him on Twitter: @PatrickMichels.
Republish this article
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Republish Our Content
Thanks for your interest in republishing a story from Reveal. As a nonprofit newsroom, we want to share our work with as many people as possible. You are free to embed our audio and video content and republish any written story for free under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 license and will indemnify our content as long as you strictly follow these guidelines:
-
Do not change the story. Do not edit our material, except only to reflect changes in time and location. (For example, “yesterday” can be changed to “last week,” and “Portland, Ore.” to “Portland” or “here.”)
-
Please credit us early in the coverage. Our reporter(s) must be bylined. We prefer the following format: By Will Evans, Reveal.
-
If republishing our stories, please also include this language at the end of the story: “This story was produced by Reveal from The Center for Investigative Reporting, a nonprofit news organization. Learn more at revealnews.org and subscribe to the Reveal podcast, produced with PRX, at revealnews.org/podcast.”
-
Include all links from the story, and please link to us at https://www.revealnews.org.
PHOTOS
-
You can republish Reveal photos only if you run them in or alongside the stories with which they originally appeared and do not change them.
-
If you want to run a photo apart from that story, please request specific permission to license by contacting Digital Engagement Producer Sarah Mirk, smirk@revealnews.org. Reveal often uses photos we purchase from Getty and The Associated Press; those are not available for republication.
DATA
-
If you want to republish Reveal graphics or data, please contact Data Editor Soo Oh, soh@revealnews.org.
IN GENERAL
-
We do not compensate anyone who republishes our work. You also cannot sell our material separately or syndicate it.
-
You can’t republish our material wholesale, or automatically; you need to select stories to be republished individually. To inquire about syndication or licensing opportunities, please contact Sarah Mirk, smirk@revealnews.org.
-
If you plan to republish our content, you must notify us republish@revealnews.org or email Sarah Mirk, smirk@revealnews.org.
-
If we send you a request to remove our content from your website, you must agree to do so immediately.
-
Please note, we will not provide indemnification if you are located or publishing outside the United States, but you may contact us to obtain a license and indemnification on a case-by-case basis.
If you have any other questions, please contact us at republish@revealnews.org.