For Immediate release // Please Excuse Cross Posting
August 9th, 2017
NDLON Suggests Questions for Sheriff McDonnell During Zocalo Public Square discussion on Trump’s impact on “Immigrant LA"
Los Angeles – On Wednesday evening, Zocalo Public Square will host a panel discussion titled “What Does Trump Mean for Immigrant LA?” The panel will be moderated by Jennifer Medina, NY Times National Correspondent, and will include Los Angeles Times immigration reporter Cindy Carcamo, Los Angeles County Sheriff Jim McDonnell, World Trade Center Los Angeles president Stephen Cheung, and director of USC’s Tomás Rivera Policy Institute Roberto Suro. The panel features no immigrants, although event planners have stated that questions from the audience will be granted.
In advance of the event, NDLON suggests the following questions for Sheriff McDonnell at Zocalo Public Square Event:
1. Do you believe non-citizens have an equal right to rehabilitate themselves after being convicted for a crime? If so, why should immigrants be subject to double-punishment?
2. Do you believe it is proper for local criminal law enforcement agencies to do any work in the area of federal civil law enforcement? Yes or no.
3. Do you agree with Trump’s ICE director that undocumented immigrants “should be looking over their shoulders” with respect to law enforcement? If not, what steps have you taken to respond to the fear of that statement?
4. Have you spoken with anyone from the Trump administration about SB54? Anyone from ICE, from AG, from DHS, from WH?
5. You recently published an OpEd about support for the TRUST ACT. You never supported it while you were a chief of police in Long Beach. When did you change your mind, and why?
6. You have said that ICE will retaliate against California by conducting street raids if SB54 is signed-into law. Do you believe it is okay for ICE to issue such threats? Have you asked whether ICE will refrain from doing raids if SB54 isn’t signed (as LAPD Chief Beck did)?
7. In 2012, Sheriff Lee Baca threatened to not comply with the TRUST ACT if it was signed-into law. Was this appropriate?