July, 15 2009, 01:33pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Maria Archuleta, (212) 519-7808; media@aclu.org
Linda Paris, (202) 675-2312; media@dcaclu.org
ACLU Demands Disclosure of New Parameters for Flawed State and Local Immigration Enforcement Program
Federal 287(g) Initiative Results in Illegal Profiling and Threatens Public Safety
WASHINGTON
The
American Civil Liberties Union filed a Freedom of Information Act
request Tuesday for new documents governing the continued delegation to
state and local law enforcement agencies of federal immigration
enforcement authority. The fundamentally flawed program has been
associated with serious civil rights abuses and public safety concerns.
Secretary
Janet Napolitano announced Friday that the Department of Homeland
Security had developed a new standardized Memorandum of Agreement (MOA)
for use when it delegates immigration enforcement authority to specific
agencies under Section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act.
She also announced that DHS had entered into new MOAs with 11
additional law enforcement agencies. However, DHS refused requests by
journalists and the public to release the 11 recently-signed MOAs and
the new standardized agreement, even though DHS routinely made 287(g)
MOAs public under the Bush administration.
"No
amount of tinkering with the 287(g) program is likely to solve the fact
that it threatens public safety and undermines the basic guarantee of
equal treatment by increasing profiling of people who look or sound
'foreign,'" said Omar Jadwat, staff attorney with the ACLU Immigrants'
Rights Project. "Still, DHS's refusal to disclose these new documents
is a disappointing and legally unsupportable step back from with
Bush administration practice and makes it impossible to fully evaluate
the changes to this highly controversial program. DHS should
immediately release the documents we have requested."
The
ACLU has long sought to end the 287(g) agreements between DHS and state
or local agencies that are, by design, fundamentally flawed. The
287(g) agreements have encouraged illegal racial profiling and civil
rights abuses as well as the mistaken and unlawful detention and
deportation of U.S. citizens and permanent residents, as reflected in a
series of lawsuits, all while diverting scarce resources from
traditional local law enforcement functions.
"Enforcement
of immigration law, like tax law, belongs exclusively to the federal
government. One body of immigration law governs the entire country;
those laws are written and passed by Congress and should be enforced by
federal law enforcement, not by local and state police," said Joanne
Lin, ACLU Legislative Counsel. "There is a specialized federal agency
to focus on immigration enforcement - DHS - just as there is a
specialized federal agency to focus on tax compliance and enforcement -
the IRS. State and local police do not pull drivers over for tax law
violations; likewise they should not pull drivers over for immigration
law violations. The 287(g) program has proven to be a failure --
resulting in rampant illegal
profiling by local police under the cloak of federal immigration
enforcement power. DHS needs to terminate, not tweak, the 287(g)
program."
This
past April, the Police Foundation, a leading nonpartisan, research and
training nonprofit dedicated to improving public safety, reported that
many sheriffs and police chiefs across the country disapprove of the
local immigration enforcement program. According to the Police
Foundation study, law enforcement executives believe that "immigration
enforcement by local police undermines their core public safety
mission, diverts scarce resources, increases their exposure to
liability and litigation, and exacerbates fear in communities already
distrustful of police."
In
recent months, Congress held two oversight hearings and heard from U.S.
citizens who have been profiled and detained by local police acting
under 287(g) programs. In addition to charges of 287(g) program
"mismanagement" by the Government Accountability Office, the DHS
Inspector General has undertaken an audit of the 287(g) program and the
Department of Justice has launched a civil rights investigation into
the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office, which has an extensive 287(g)
program.
In February, a federal court decided that a class action lawsuit, Ortega Melendres v. Arpaio,
could proceed against Sheriff Joe Arpaio. In that case, the ACLU is
co-counsel for Latino plaintiffs who were subjected to racial profiling
and police misconduct by the Sheriff's Office in Maricopa County,
Arizona, a jurisdiction with the most aggressive 287(g) program in the
country. In another case, the ACLU has sued on behalf of Pedro Guzman,
a U.S. citizen born in California, who was illegally deported under Los
Angeles County Sheriff Office's 287(g) program. These cases are still
pending.
"If
the Department of Homeland Security cannot recognize failure when
everyone else involved sees it, Congress should exercise its oversight
and monitoring responsibilities to end the 287(g) program," added
Lin. "Minor modifications are not enough to fix this fundamentally
flawed program."
The ACLU's FOIA request can be found at: https://www.aclu.org/immigrants/gen/40308lgl20090714.html
For the DHS release about the revamped and expanded 287 (g) program, go to https://www.dhs.gov/ynews/releases/pr_1247246453625.shtm
For ACLU's submitted testimony on 287 (g) program, go to:
https://www.aclu.org/immigrants/gen/39062leg20090304.html
For ACLU report on racial and ethnic profiling in America, go to
https://www.aclu.org/intlhumanrights/racialjustice/40055pub20090629.html
For more information about the Ortega Melendres v. Arpaio case, go to https://www.aclu.org/immigrants/gen/35998lgl20080716.html#attach
For more details about the Guzman case, go to
https://www.aclu-sc.org/releases/view/102796
The American Civil Liberties Union was founded in 1920 and is our nation's guardian of liberty. The ACLU works in the courts, legislatures and communities to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties guaranteed to all people in this country by the Constitution and laws of the United States.
(212) 549-2666LATEST NEWS
128 House Democrats Join GOP to Kill Trump Impeachment Resolution
Rep. Al Green's measure calls the president "a threat to American democracy."
Jun 24, 2025
Over half of the Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives voted alongside all Republicans present on Tuesday to kill Rep. Al Green's impeachment resolution spurred by President Donald Trump's attack on Iranian nuclear sites.
The vote to table the Texas Democrat's five-page measure was 344-79, with 128 Democratic members of the House—including Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (N.Y.)—and 216 Republicans coming together to block the effort.
While Green has pushed to impeach the Republican president over various actions, his new resolution accuses Trump of abuse of presidential powers by disregarding congressional authority to declare war.
"President Trump's unilateral, unprovoked use of force without congressional authorization or notice constitutes an abuse of power when there was no imminent threat to the United States, which facilitates the devolution of American democracy into authoritarianism, with an authoritarian president who has instigated an attack on the United States Capitol, denied persons due process of the law, and called for the impeachment of federal judges who ruled against him—making Donald J. Trump a threat to American democracy," the resolution states.
"In starting his illegal and unconstitutional war with Iran without the constitutionally mandated consent of Congress or appropriate notice to Congress, President Trump acted in direct violation of the War Powers Clause of the Constitution," it continues.
The vote came after Jeffries faced criticism for telling reporters he had not looked at a bipartisan resolution that would require congressional approval for military action against Iran—and as Democratic leaders are under fire for their tepid response to Trump and GOP lawmakers.
In a statement after Tuesday's vote, John Bonifaz, a constitutional attorney and president of the advocacy group Free Speech for People, commended Green "for his courage and his leadership," and praised all 79 Democrats who "abided by their oath to protect and defend the Constitution and voted no on the motion to table this article of impeachment."
"Those who voted yes on that motion will be recorded in history for ignoring their oath and standing on the sidelines while this lawless president tramples on the Constitution," he argued. "They will now need to answer to their constituents on why, in the face of this attack on the Constitution, they did not stand up."
Bonifaz also noted his group's campaign to oust the Republican leader and predicted that "this was the first vote on impeaching Donald Trump in this presidential term, but it will not be the last." Trump was impeached twice during his first term.
"More than 700,000 people across the country have already joined us at www.impeachtrumpagain.org to demand that members of Congress do their job and impeach and remove Trump from public office for his multiple abuses of power," he said. "This movement will only continue to grow, and we will continue to stand up in the defense of our democracy and our Constitution at this critical moment in history."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Performative Bullsh*t': 16 House Republicans Get Cold Feet Over Medicaid Cuts
However, one critic noted that the lawmakers "already voted for the largest cut to Medicaid in American history—and when the time comes, they'll cave... once again to give their billionaire donors a massive tax break."
Jun 24, 2025
Under pressure from millions of constituents who would be stripped of healthcare coverage under the GOP's slash-and-burn reconciliation package, more than a dozen House Republicans claimed Tuesday that they would not back the Senate's version of the legislation if it contains proposed cuts to the Medicaid provider tax.
"Protecting Medicaid is essential for the vulnerable constituents we were elected to represent. Therefore, we cannot support a final bill that threatens access to coverage or jeopardizes the stability of our hospitals and providers," wrote 16 House Republicans led by Rep. David Valadao (R-Calif.)—whose largely rural Central Valley district has one of the highest concentration of Medicaid recipients in the nation—in a letter to Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) and House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.).
"Throughout the budget process, we have consistently affirmed our commitment to ensuring that reductions in federal spending do not come at the expense of our most vulnerable constituents," the lawmakers' letter continues. "We write to reiterate that commitment to those we represent here in Washington."
"We support the Medicaid reforms in H.R. 1, which strengthen the program's ability to serve children, pregnant women, the elderly, and individuals with disabilities," the letter states, referring to provisions in the House version of the so-called "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" that would still slash federal Medicaid spending by billions of dollars, introduce work requirements for recipients, and impose other conditions that critics say would result in millions of vulnerable people losing their coverage in order to pay for a massive tax cut that would disproportionately benefit the wealthy and corporations.
The letter continues:
The Senate proposal also undermines the balanced approach taken to craft the Medicaid provisions in H.R. 1—particularly regarding provider taxes and state directed payments. The Senate version treats expansion and nonexpansion states unfairly, fails to preserve existing state programs, and imposes stricter limits that do not give hospitals sufficient time to adjust to new budgetary constraints or to identify alternative funding sources.
We are also concerned about rushed implementation timelines, penalties for expansion states, changes to the community engagement requirements for adults with dependents, and cuts to emergency Medicaid funding. These changes would place additional burdens on hospitals already stretched thin by legal and moral obligations to provide care.
"Protecting Medicaid is essential for the vulnerable constituents we were elected to represent," the lawmakers concluded. "Therefore, we cannot support a final bill that threatens access to coverage or jeopardizes the stability of our hospitals and providers."
Both chambers of Congress are scheduled to be on recess next week for the Independence Day holiday. Senators still have not voted on the package—and both chambers must pass identical versions of the megabill before it will reach President Donald Trump's desk.
Trump impatiently said on his Truth Social network Tuesday: "To my friends in the Senate, lock yourself in a room if you must, don't go home, and GET THE DEAL DONE THIS WEEK. Work with the House so they can pick it up, and pass it, IMMEDIATELY. NO ONE GOES ON VACATION UNTIL IT'S DONE."
Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee spokesperson Justin Chermol dismissed the 16 GOP lawmakers' letter as "performative bullshit."
"These so-called moderates already voted for the largest cut to Medicaid in American history—and when the time comes, they'll cave to their D.C. party bosses once again to give their billionaire donors a massive tax break," Chermol added.Keep ReadingShow Less
Three Years After Roe Reversal, Abortion Rights Defenders Say Dobbs Legitimized Extremism
"These anti-choice fanatics will stop at nothing. They don't think their work is finished even after such a horrible and wide-ranging decision as Dobbs," warned the Senate's top Democrat.
Jun 24, 2025
Reproductive freedom advocates on Tuesday marked the third anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court reversingRoe v. Wade by calling out Republican decision-makers—including President Donald Trump—for the harmful impacts of the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision.
"Three years after the Supreme Court's devastating Dobbs decision stripped away constitutional protections for reproductive freedom, we face not only the predicted economic catastrophe but a terrifying escalation of political violence targeting women's rights advocates," said Equal Rights Advocates executive director Noreen Farrell, pointing to the recent assassination of former Minnesota House Speaker Melissa Hortman (DFL-61) and attempted murder of state Sen. John Hoffman (DFL-34).
"Equal Rights Advocates warned that Dobbs would unleash more than legal restrictions—it would legitimize extremism. Now we see the tragic fulfillment of that prediction," Farrell continued. "This administration's policies represent calculated economic warfare against women, particularly low-income women and women of color. The case of Adriana Smith last week illustrates the extreme consequences of the Dobbs decision—a pregnant Black woman denied medical care, becoming a brain-dead incubator for a fetus against her medical directive and her family's wishes."
"In the 21 states with abortion bans and extreme restrictions, women continue to die, and along with their providers, are being threatened, targeted, and criminalized."
The Georgia law doctors at Emory University Hospital cited to keep Smith on life support—allegedly without the input or consent of her family—until her fetus could be delivered is one of various anti-choice state laws that took effect after Dobbs.
"For the last three years, we have witnessed firsthand what happens when politicians try to control the rights of people to practice basic bodily autonomy—with dire results," said Dr. Jamila Perritt, an OB-GYN and abortion provider who serves as president and CEO of Physicians for Reproductive Health, in a Tuesday statement.
"We have seen countless people forced to leave their communities to get basic healthcare, forced to remain pregnant when they wouldn't have otherwise, criminalized for experiencing pregnancy loss, and ultimately, we have seen people dying after being turned away when seeking emergency abortion care," Perritt detailed.
The Guttmacher Institute on Tuesday released new data about the 155,000 abortion patients who traveled out of state to obtain care last year. The group said that "similar to 2023, Illinois remained a critical access point in 2024, with 35,470 patients traveling from across the South and Midwest to obtain abortion care in the state."
Guttmacher Institute data scientist and study lead Isaac Maddow-Zimet noted that "while these findings show us where and how far patients are traveling, they are not able to capture the numerous financial, logistical, social, and emotional obstacles people face. In addition to the travel costs, driving or flying across state lines often requires taking time off work, navigating complex logistics and arranging childcare, not to mention paying for the abortion itself."
As states continue to pass restrictions post-Dobbs, patients' options are dwindling. For example, Guttmacher director of state policy Candace Gibson explained that "Florida had been an important access point for abortion in the Southeast, so when the state's six-week ban went into effect in May 2024, it was not just Floridians who were impacted, but also the thousands of out-of-state patients who would have traveled there for care."
While running to retake the White House last year, Republican President Donald Trump—who appointed three of the Supreme Court's six right-wing justices during his first term—came out against a Florida ballot measure that would end his state's strict abortion ban and bragged about his role in reversing Roe but also tried to downplay the importance of reproductive rights to voters.
"It's been three years since people in the United States have lost their federal constitutional right to abortion; three years since President Trump's handpicked Supreme Court justices stripped Americans of this fundamental right to freedom," Alexis McGill Johnson, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Action Fund, said in a Tuesday statement. "The consequences have been devastating, even lethal."
"We can't know all the names of the women who have died because of abortion bans, but we will never forget that people have endured injury, pain, and suffering because of the Dobbs decision," she declared. "We continue to fight President Trump and his backers' attacks on reproductive rights, including their effort to 'defund' Planned Parenthood in Congress and end abortion access for everyone, everywhere. Planned Parenthood Action Fund will never stop advocating for a country where all people have the power to control their own bodies, lives, and futures."
Reproductive Freedom for All president and CEO Mini Timmaraju was similarly determined on Tuesday, launching a campaign to mobilize against Trump and the GOP.
"In the 21 states with abortion bans and extreme restrictions, women continue to die, and along with their providers, are being threatened, targeted, and criminalized," Timmaraju said. "And while the Trump administration continues to gut our fundamental freedoms, we continue to fight against the GOP's attacks on Planned Parenthood, Medicaid, and essential reproductive care."
Congressional Democrats—who have minorities in both chambers—joined advocacy group leaders in using the Dobbs anniversary to direct anger at the president and Republican policymakers working to strip away reproductive freedom from people nationwide.
During a Tuesday press conference, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said the high court's June 2022 ruling "will go down in history as one of the worst, most harmful, most regressive decisions in modern history" and stressed that "people are dying as a result of the Dobbs decision."
Noting that many patients have had to travel or wait for care, Schumer said that "this is abominable. We know that this is what Republicans want, a total ban on abortion. These anti-choice fanatics will stop at nothing. They don't think their work is finished even after such a horrible and wide-ranging decision as Dobbs. Reproductive freedom is under attack on all sides. Extremists are banning and restricting abortion, criminalizing providers, defunding care, and interfering with lifesaving medicines."
"These attacks are also devastating our economy. With fewer reproductive healthcare protections, fewer women are participating in the workforce. State-level restrictions on abortion access combined with the lack of federal protection cost the economy more than $133 billion nationally," he continued. "The 16 states with the most restrictive abortion policies were responsible for $64 billion in economic loss."
The Senate's top Democrat also called out his GOP colleagues for what he called "a Republican backdoor abortion ban done in the reconciliation bill," taking aim at "two nasty provisions to defund Planned Parenthood and eliminate coverage for comprehensive reproductive care" from the Affordable Care Act marketplace.
"I'm here to say that Democrats are going to fight like hell to strip these cruel provisions from the Republican bill, including in the Byrd bath, which will be occurring today or tomorrow," he pledged, referring to the Senate parliamentarian's review of the GOP megabill. "Just as we fought back against attacks on abortion before, we will fight these nasty provisions with every fiber in our being."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular