PLAINTIFFS FILE PETITION FOR REHEARING IN NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS IN PUENTE V. ARPAIO
Arizona Migrant Group Seeks to Preserve Injunction Against Provisions of Two Arizona Statutes Used to Criminalize Immigrant Workers
For Immediate Release
May 17, 2016
Phoenix, Arizona – Yesterday, Plaintiffs in Puente vs. Arpaio asked the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to reconsider a May 2 decision which overturned a preliminary injunction issued last year barring Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio and Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery from enforcing provisions of Arizona law that criminalize migrants for working to provide for their families. The Petition argues that the decision by a three-judge panel conflicts with other Ninth Circuit and Supreme Court cases, and should either be reconsidered by the panel or reheard by a larger number of judges.
Carlos Garcia, Executive Director of Puente Arizona, a lead plaintiff in the case, said: “Sheriff Arpaio and County Attorney Bill Montgomery must not be allowed to burden migrants with felony convictions for working to provide for their families. We have been politically scapegoated and dehumanized for long enough. These laws are cruel and unjust and we will not stop fighting until we know that our community is safe.”
“Arizona’s effort to recast its identity theft laws as an immigration enforcement tool was unconstitutional from the start,” said Annie Lai of the Immigrant Rights Clinic at the University of California, Irvine School of Law. “We are asking the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to review its May 2 decision and restore the carefully considered order of the District Court from January 2015 that brought an end to the seven-year campaign of raids. Anything else would be a grave deviation from existing law and could compromise future litigants’ ability to turn to the courts for the protection of constitutional rights.”
The case concerns provisions of two Arizona statutes passed in 2007 and 2008 as part of Arizona’s “attrition through enforcement” immigration platform designed to make life so miserable for migrants that they would self deport. In January 2015, District Court Judge David Campbell enjoined enforcement of the statutes during the pendency of the suit. The filing of yesterday’s petition means that the District Court’s injunction will remain in place until a decision can be made by the Court of Appeals.
Plaintiffs in the case include Puente, workers affected by the raids, and several faith leaders who reside in Maricopa County and object to the use of their tax dollars to finance the raids. The plaintiffs are represented by the University of California, Irvine School of Law Immigrant Rights Clinic, the National Day Laborer Organizing Network (NDLON), the ACLU of Arizona, Hadsell Stormer & Renick LLP, Quarles & Brady LLP and attorney Ray Ybarra Maldonado.
The Plaintiffs’ petition for rehearing, as well as the Ninth Circuit decision and the United States’ amicus brief filed on March 18, are available, here.
In honor of Jenni Rivera R.I.P.
In honor of Jenni Rivera R.I.P.
Los Angeles City Council Votes on TRUST Act
National Day Laborer Organizing Network Statement
LOS ANGELES –The Los Angeles City Council votes on the TRUST Act today following incorrect claims made earlier this week by some sheriffs that the measure conflicts with federal law.
Chris Newman, Legal Director of the National Day Laborer Organizing Network (NDLON), released the following statement:
“Sherriff Lee Baca’s profound misunderstanding of the law and his unwillingness to join the rest of us in an earnest policy discussion is proof of the need for the TRUST Act.”
Press release on letter from law professors and deans to Gov. Brown refuting sheriffs’ claims below
Prominent Law Professors and Deans Endorse TRUST Act,
Refute Some Sheriffs’ Incorrect Claims that Measure Conflicts with Federal Law
Support for Legislation Reaches Critical Mass as Key Law Enforcement Officials Back Bill to Limit Immigrant Detentions
SACRAMENTO – Support for the TRUST Act, the California legislation billed as the “Anti-Arizona” immigration policy, continues to grow across a broad coalition urging California Gov. Jerry Brown to sign the bill into law.
Top law professors from around the country issued a letter to Gov. Brown today supporting the legislation and refuting the principal argument against the TRUST Act(AB 1081 – Ammiano). The letter, signed by 31 professors, explains that federal requests to local law enforcement officials to detain undocumented immigrants for additional time are not orders carrying the force of law, as some sheriffs have claimed. In fact, the Professors explain, these “hold” requests are completely optional, and California’s effort to limit them is entirely within its power. Pledges made by some Sheriffs to defy the legislation if it is signed into law have no legal basis.
Meanwhile, two crucial new law enforcement leaders endorsed the legislation this week, including a past President of the State Sheriff’s Association. The endorsement highlights divisions within the Association, the sole entity which has registered opposition to the bill. The division emerged as a wide coalition continues to grow in support of the bill.
The TRUST Act has captured national attention. It would rebuild community confidence in law enforcement – and save local resources – by limiting unfair detentions for deportation purposes in local jails often caused by the federal government’s “Secure Communities” deportation program.
Key points made to the Governor in the law professors’ letter include:
- The primary opposition argument against the TRUST Act - that immigration detainers are mandatory orders - is without merit
- Immigration detainers raise Due Process and Fourth Amendment concerns
- The TRUST Act would support Equal Protection guarantees under the Constitution.
While the California State Sheriffs’ Association remains opposed, letters of support from individual law enforcement leaders have poured into the Governor’s office this week, including from Santa Clara County Sherriff Laurie Smith and San Francisco Police Chief Greg Suhr. (They join Oakland Police Chief Jordan and Palo Alto Police Burns.) Other new supporters of the measure include the Asian Pacific Islander Legislative Caucus; the California Legislative Black Caucus; the Califomia Latino Legislative Caucus, and the California Legislative Lesbian Gay Bisexual and Transgender Caucus, who sent a joint letter to the Governor earlier this week.
Under the TRUST Act, local law enforcement would have clear guidelines on when not to submit to immigration hold requests from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), while allowing holds for those convicted or charged with serious or violent felonies. Cook County and Chicago have far more expansive legislation already in place.
In California alone, nearly 80,000 immigrants have been deported since the program’s inception. As of July 2012, cumulative data shows that 69 percent of deportations were of people not convicted of a crime or convicted of only minor offenses, including traffic violations, selling food without a permit, and others. A recent report showed that California spends $65 million annually to participate in the program.
# # #
Legal Analysis of immigration detainers and the constitutionality of their enforcement:
"Administrative detainers are unsupported by sworn evidence or probable cause, and they are not reviewed by a neutral magistrate. Local detention based solely on a detainer from ICE is no more jusitfied under the law than detention based on a postcard from ICE."
- Michael J. Wishnie, William O. Douglas Clinical Professor of Law at Yale Law School.
"Without the TRUST Act, individual local police will, in practical effect, be entrusted with the discretion to make federal immigration policy on the ground by deciding who is arrested and brought into contact with the federal immigration enforcement system. Federal prosecutorial discretion can only have a limited effect in detecting and eliminating any racial and ethnic profiling that occurs in the initial arrest context."
- Hiroshi Motomura, Susan Westerberg Prager Professor of Law at UCLA Law School.
"DHS has made it mandatory that all counties participate in Secure Communities by sharing fingerprint information, but the requests for ICE holds have never been mandatory and are just that, requests."
- Allison Davenport, Clinical Instructor & Lecturer International Human Rights Law Clinic University of California, Berkeley School of Law
Phoenix, AZ - French-Chilean musician Ana Tijoux is the latest artist to stand with immigrants in Arizona as part of the “Alto Arizona” campaign, an ongoing effort to bring visibility, recognition, dignity and healing to migrants who have been targets of hate in Arizona and around the world.
Tijoux spent her childhood in France after her parents had to flee a repressive regime in Chile. It was there where she discovered hip hop music, and where she began her musical career. Her name was recognized in the international market after collaborating with the Mexican artist Julieta Venegas in the songEres Para Mi. Her album entitled 1977, which has songs that touch on issues such as political injustice and her life in France, was nominated for a Grammyin 2010.
Now she’s out with a new music video “Shock” (http://bit.ly/LZ3GfB) directed by Alex Rivera (Sleepdealers) from the album “La Bala” which features Tijoux with protesters of Arizona’s infamous Sheriff Arpaio and the anti-immigrant law, S.B. 1070, which the United States Supreme Court ruled was largely unconstitutional on June 25, 2012. Filmed after a concert with Puente Arizona, Tijoux’s concert served efforts that pre-date SB1070 to challenge the state’s anti-immigrant climate and defend and advance the rights of migrant families.
Mary Rose Wilcox, Pastor Stewart, Puente, ACLU Cite Pending Humanitarian Crisis, Call for Suspension of Secure Communities, Termination of All 287(g) Agreements in Arizona
PHOENIX, 6/27/2012 -- In the wake of the Supreme Court ruling in the Department of Justice SB1070 case that allowed section 2B, the racial profiling section of the law to move forward, more than one hundred Arizona-based organizations and notable individuals sent a letter calling on the state's former governor, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Napolitano, to end DHS' collaboration with Arizona to prevent a pending "humanitarian crisis."