A uncommon showdown is taking form between the county Board of Supervisors and the sheriff over barring cooperation with federal immigration authorities within the jails, a conflict that’s rising weeks earlier than President-elect Donald Trump takes workplace for a second time period and goals to ship on guarantees of mass deportations.
The board handed a decision every week in the past to ban deputies from aiding U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, together with in the case of the switch of immigrant inmates. However county Sheriff Kelly Martinez instantly stated she wouldn’t comply and would proceed to comply with state legislation, which nonetheless permits some degree of cooperation.
RELATED: Santa Cruz County declares itself sanctuary neighborhood for immigrants
The dispute has since grown, with immigration rights teams writing a strongly worded letter urging Martinez to rethink, and the Sheriff’s Workplace reiterating in an announcement that the company wouldn’t change its coverage. Every is citing state legislation to bolster their aspect.
The California Values Act, or SB 54, which was signed in 2017 by then-Gov. Jerry Brown, already restricts cooperation with federal immigration officers, however it nonetheless permits native companies to inform the federal authorities of launch dates and to switch people to ICE below sure circumstances.
In 2023, 25 inmates had been transferred from San Diego County jails to ICE custody, based on a sheriff’s report. The inmates had been jailed regionally on felony convictions that included homicide, assault with a lethal weapon, DUI, drug possession, housebreaking and participation in a avenue gang.
Folks attend the San Diego County Board of Supervisors assembly on Dec. 10. (Ana Ramirez / The San Diego Union-Tribune)
Below the brand new county coverage, the Sheriff’s Workplace and different county companies can be prohibited from aiding within the switch of an inmate into immigration custody and not using a warrant or court docket order. The coverage focuses solely on civil immigration enforcement and doesn’t have an effect on federal felony investigations.
The decision, authorised by a 3-1 vote, directed the county’s chief administrative officer to make suggestions inside 180 days on easy methods to most successfully implement the coverage. The measure handed with the three votes of the Democratic supervisors, with Republican Jim Desmond casting the lone dissenting vote and Joel Anderson absent.
Each earlier than and after the vote, Martinez, who has been sheriff since 2023, made it clear she wouldn’t be abiding by the brand new coverage and would proceed to comply with the cooperation tips spelled out in state legislation.
The San Diego Immigrant Rights Consortium, a coalition of greater than 40 native organizations, urged Martinez to rethink in a Dec. 12 letter.
“We were disappointed by your declaration that you would not be following (the board’s policy),” reads the letter despatched by coalition Chair Ian Seruelo. “It disrespects the will of the community, and goes against not just the values of our county but state law itself.”
Folks attend the San Diego County Board of Supervisors assembly to talk about a brand new immigration coverage on Dec. 10. (Ana Ramirez / The San Diego Union-Tribune)
What the coalition argued within the letter, which was additionally despatched to state Lawyer Common Rob Bonta, is that to fail to take action can be a violation of SB 54, which states “a law enforcement official shall have discretion to cooperate with immigration authorities only if doing so would not violate any federal, state, or local law, or local policy.”
However the Sheriff’s Workplace doubled down and defended its coverage.
“Current state law strikes the right balance between limiting local law enforcement’s cooperation with immigration authorities, ensuring public safety, and building community trust,” the workplace stated in an announcement.
Below state legislation, the Sheriff’s Workplace can share the discharge dates of individuals in its custody if they’ve qualifying convictions for sure severe, violent or intercourse crimes, officers stated.
“Immigration officials decide whether they will be present when the individual is released from custody. The Sheriff’s Office does not coordinate with, nor will it delay an individual’s release to accommodate immigration officials.”
The Sheriff’s Workplace additionally invoked one other state legislation that spells out a sheriff’s authority, insisting that its insurance policies are set by the sheriff as an independently elected official, not by the Board of Supervisors.
“California law prohibits the Board of Supervisors from interfering with the independent, constitutionally, and statutorily designated investigative functions of the Sheriff, and is clear that the Sheriff has the sole and exclusive authority to operate the county jails,” the assertion learn.
The language is taken from two completely different legal guidelines: Authorities Code 25303, which spells out the function of a board of supervisors, and 26605, which supplies the sheriff authority over jails.
The California Lawyer Common’s Workplace stated in an announcement that it expects “that all local law enforcement agencies comply with SB 54 and all applicable state and local laws.”
However the workplace stated it couldn’t present authorized recommendation or evaluation when requested in regards to the dispute.
“In light of the President-elect’s threats of mass detention, arrests, and deportation, we are monitoring compliance closely,” the company stated in a separate assertion. “We will take a look at the facts of each scenario as it arises; and we will respond appropriately if we believe an agency is violating the law.”
The Sheriff’s Workplace has stated the company doesn’t plan to hunt authorized motion towards the county.
For Trump to hold out his mass deportations, the federal authorities would definitely want the assistance of native authorities, notably jails if the main target stays on migrants with felony backgrounds.
The county’s controversial coverage has met with opposition, together with from Trump’s “border czar” choose Tom Homan, who informed the New York Put up he’ll search to thwart the coverage.
Desmond, who solid the vote in opposition, has criticized the board’s choice to make San Diego a “super-sanctuary county.”
“I remain committed to standing against these extreme measures and advocating for policies that prioritize the safety and security of our communities,” he stated.
An ICE spokesperson stated in an announcement that the federal company values the continued cooperation with different legislation enforcement companies as “crucial to ICE’s mission of ensuring the national security, public safety, and integrity of the nation’s immigration system.
“Some jurisdictions have chosen to limit their cooperation with ICE in recent years. This has had a negative impact on ICE operations, including the need for ICE officers to make arrests in less-secure environments which increases safety risks to both the public and the officers. Unfortunately, these non-cooperation policies often end up shielding dangerous criminals who victimize the same communities.”
Whereas some have expressed considerations about what the county’s coverage might imply by way of public security, others imagine that preserving native legislation enforcement out of immigration issues will result in larger belief amongst migrant communities.
Different California counties have adopted comparable insurance policies. Vargas famous within the board’s letter introducing the coverage earlier than the vote that it’s just like one first adopted in Santa Clara in 2011 and later up to date in 2019.
“Our policy is meant to keep our residents safe, and to demonstrate the tremendous value that immigrants bring to our community,” Santa Clara board President Susan Ellenberg stated in an interview Friday. “And the policy is not reactive specifically to any one political administration but rather is deeply reflective of our county’s values.”
Santa Clara County and San Francisco gained a lawsuit in 2019 difficult Trump’s risk throughout his first time period to withhold federal funding from cities and counties that didn’t cooperate along with his immigration enforcement plan. Nevertheless, Trump advisers proceed to reiterate such threats.
Initially Printed: December 22, 2024 at 7:56 AM PST
