5
#000000
#FFFFFF
For Immediate Release
July, 17 2009, 12:54pm EDT
Contact:
Maria Archuleta, (212) 519-7808 or 549-2666; media@aclu.org
Linda Paris, (202) 675-2312; media@dcaclu.org
DHS Continues State and Local Immigration Enforcement Program Without Meaningful Changes
New MOA Governing Federal 287(g) Initiative Does Not Address Program's Serious Flaws
WASHINGTON
After a congressional request and multiple Freedom of Information Act
(FOIA) requests, including one from the American Civil Liberties Union,
the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) released a new standardized
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) that it will use in its expanded 287(g)
program granting state and local law enforcement agencies federal
immigration enforcement authority. The 287(g) program has led to
serious civil rights abuses and public safety concerns, and according
to an analysis by the ACLU, the changes in the new MOA do nothing to
solve these problems.
"The new standardized MOA makes no
serious attempt at discouraging illegal racial profiling or reducing
the conflict between sound community policing principles and the
expansion of this program," said Omar Jadwat, staff attorney with the
ACLU Immigrants' Rights Project. "The Department of Homeland Security
has claimed that the new MOA contains many significant improvements,
but now that we actually have the document, it is clear that many of
the claimed changes are really not changes at all, that the remaining
changes have little or no positive operative effect, and that the new
MOA actually takes several disturbing steps backward, particularly in
the area of transparency."
Section 287(g) of the Immigration
and Nationality Act provides for the delegation of immigration
enforcement authority in certain circumstances to specific state or
local agencies. Previously, MOAs between U.S. Immigration and Customs
Enforcement (ICE) and local law enforcement varied by jurisdiction, but
the new standardized MOA would govern all 287(g) partnerships.
In a comparison of the new
standardized MOA to the MOA that ICE signed with Maricopa County,
Arizona in February 2007, the ACLU found that the new MOA would do
little or nothing to correct the egregious racial profiling and civil
rights abuses that have occurred there, and in some respects, the new
MOA is actually worse than the original from the Bush administration.
The new MOA includes a list of
"priority levels" of different categories of suspected violators, but
even assuming those priorities are sound, the MOA does not include any
measures to ensure that its priorities translate into practice, such as
requiring that arrest statistics reflect the priority levels, requiring
agencies to implement an effective prioritization system or preventing
the use of local resources to go after low-priority offenders.
A number of DHS's claimed
improvements simply cannot be verified by comparing the old and new
MOAs. For example, DHS claimed that the new MOA would reduce concerns
that individuals are arrested for minor or pretextual violations by
requiring that the arresting authority pursue any criminal charges that
justified the original arrest. But the new MOA only "expect[s]," rather
than "requires," the pursuit of charges. The old MOA contained the same
"expectation."
Some aspects of new MOA are clearly
a step in the wrong direction. The new MOA reduces the amount of
experience that a local law enforcement officer needs to become
MOA-designated; expands the list of powers granted to task force
personnel; attempts to remove 287(g) documents from public scrutiny by
subjecting even state or local records to ICE control and claiming that
documents related to the 287(g) are no longer public records; reduces
the already-low data collection and tracking requirements under the old
agreement; and authorizes the exclusion of civilian personnel from some
program reviews.
"Contrary to DHS's announcement, the
new 287(g) Memorandum of Agreement is not substantially different from
the Bush administration MOA, including the much abused agreement
currently in place in Maricopa County, Arizona," said Joanne Lin, ACLU
Legislative Counsel. "This new 287(g) MOA is not government reform.
Cosmetic changes to a written agreement will not solve the fundamental
problems associated with local police enforcement of federal civil
immigration laws. Under the Bush administration 287(g) program, local
law enforcement committed illegal profiling and civil rights violations
under the cloak of federal immigration authority. Under the newly
released 287(g) MOA, local law enforcement are free to continue the
same abuse of power. It is time for the Department of Homeland Security
and Congress to end, not mend, the 287(g) program."
The new standardized MOA, Maricopa County's MOA and the ACLU side-by-side comparison of the two can be found at: www.aclu.org/immigrants/local/40350lgl20090716.html
The ACLU's FOIA request can be found at: www.aclu.org/immigrants/gen/40308lgl20090714.html
ACLU's submitted testimony on 287 (g) program can be found at: www.aclu.org/immigrants/gen/39062leg20090304.html
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
Israel Defense Minister Deploys 'Gaza Model' in Lebanon, Ordering Destruction of Villages
One expert called the policy “an open admission of intent to commit ethnic cleansing.”
Mar 23, 2026
Israel is planning to use Gaza as a "model" for its expanding assault on Lebanon, its defense minister said on Sunday as he pledged to begin the demolition of homes in border villages.
In a statement Sunday, Defense Minister Israel Katz said he and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had ordered the Israel Defense Forces to "immediately destroy all the bridges over the Litani River that are used for terrorist activity, in order to prevent the passage of Hezbollah terrorists and weapons southward."
He also said he'd ordered the military to "accelerate the destruction of Lebanese homes in the border villages in order to thwart threats to the Israeli settlements—in accordance with the Beit Hanoun and Rafah model in Gaza."
Dylan Williams, the vice president for government affairs at the Center for International Policy, described the invocation of this "Gaza model" as "an open admission of intent to commit ethnic cleansing" in Lebanon.
The two cities Katz referred to were largely wiped off the map during the Gaza genocide.
Beit Hanoun, a city on the northeastern edge of the Gaza Strip, which once had a population of more than 50,000 people, had nearly all of its structures totally "flattened" by Israel's bombing and was totally depopulated, according to the Israeli newspaper Haaretz in mid-2025. The far-right in Israel has pushed for Jewish Israeli settlers to move in and build settlements on the territory.
Rafah has been similarly devastated, with nearly 70% of the structures "wiped out" according to an October 2025 investigation by the Center for Information Resilience.
At the time that Israeli forces moved into Rafah in mid-2024, it was the last refuge for more than 1 million Palestinians who'd been displaced from their homes elsewhere in the strip. UN experts described the attack on Rafah as a culmination of a monthslong campaign to “forcibly transfer and destroy Gaza’s population," with more than 800,000 people being forced to flee.
Human Rights Watch said on Monday that Katz's announcement demonstrated "an intent to forcibly displace residents, destroy civilian homes, and conduct strikes that could target civilians" in Lebanon as well.
Already, more than 1 million civilians in Lebanon, from the area south of the Litani River and in Beirut's southern suburbs, have become displaced following orders from the Israeli military to evacuate their homes.
Katz has said hundreds of thousands of Shiite civilians will be forbidden from returning from their south of the Litani "until the safety of Israel’s northern residents is guaranteed," and he has said Israel “will not hesitate to target anyone who is present near Hezbollah members, facilities, or means of combat.”
Human Rights Watch has said these indefinite displacements raise the concern that Israel is perpetrating the war crime of forced displacement and doing so based on religion.
“The Israeli military does not get to decide when civilians lose protections afforded by international law, nor should it be allowed to prevent displaced residents from returning to their homes based on some undefined ‘safety’ standard,” said Ramzi Kaiss, Lebanon researcher at Human Rights Watch. Deliberately targeting civilians, civilian objects, and others protected under international law would be a war crime, and countries supplying Israel with weapons need to realize they are risking complicity in war crimes too.”
Since the latest outbreak of hostilities at the beginning of March following the launch of the US-Israeli war against Iran, at least 1,024 people in Lebanon have been killed in Israeli attacks, including 79 women and 118 children, according to a report from Lebanese authorities this weekend.
Last week, the United Nations Human Rights Office reported that Israeli airstrikes in Lebanon have "destroyed hundreds of homes and civilian infrastructure, including healthcare facilities."
“For over two years, Israel’s allies and European states that purport to support and uphold human rights have buried their heads in the sand as atrocities continue in Lebanon, as in Gaza,” Kaiss said. “Atrocities flourish when there is impunity, and other countries should no longer stand by as they continue.”
Keep Reading
Show Less
Denying Claim of Talks, Iran Says Trump ‘Backed Down’ After Threat of Power Plant Retaliation
Iran's foreign ministry accused the US president of cynically trying to "reduce energy prices and gain time to implement his military plans."
Mar 23, 2026
Iran's foreign ministry on Monday denied US President Donald Trump's claim that the two sides were engaged in "productive" talks over a possible end to the conflict started by the US and Israel late last month.
According to Iranian news agencies, Iran's foreign ministry said Iranian forces' pledge to retaliate in kind against any US strikes on Iran's power plants forced the president to acquiesce. In a Truth Social post early Monday, Trump said he instructed the Pentagon to "postpone any and all military strikes against Iranian power plants and energy infrastructure for a five-day period."
Over the weekend, Trump vowed to "obliterate" Iranian power plants if the Strait of Hormuz was not fully reopened by Monday night. Iran said in response that it would hit power plants serving US military installations in Gulf nations.
"Trump, fearing Iran's response, backed down from his 48-hour ultimatum," Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting reported Monday following the US president's Truth Social post.
In a statement reported by Iran's semi-official Mehr news agency, the nation's foreign ministry said that Trump's Monday statement was "within the framework of efforts to reduce energy prices and gain time to implement his military plans."
"There are initiatives by regional countries to deescalate tensions, and our response to all of them is clear: We are not the party that started this war, and all these requests should be referred to Washington," the statement added. Iranian officials maintained that there have been no direct or indirect talks with the Trump administration over an end to the war.
Since the US and Israel started bombing late last month, Tehran has publicly rejected diplomatic talks with the US, saying Trump's decision to wage war on Iran sabotaged previous nuclear negotiations that had been progressing.
"We don't ask for ceasefire, but this war must end, in a way that our enemies never again think about repeating such attacks," Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said last week.
Trump's announcement that he would hold off on striking Iranian power plants for at least five days was seen by some in the US as a cynical attempt to calm shaky global markets, not an indication of movement toward a diplomatic resolution.
"Trump isn't announcing a pause on strikes. He's saying he's postponing a possible war crime—strikes on Iran's civilian energy infrastructure," said US Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.). "Also, this isn't a message to Iran. It's a panicky message to the markets: 'No war escalation until markets close on Friday.'"
Jamal Abdi, president of the National Iranian American Council, said in a statement Monday that "we hope the president isn’t negotiating with himself for social media and TV cameras to calm the markets while there is really no end to this war in sight."
“It should shock Americans that, before this apparent pullback, our commander-in-chief is threatening war crimes and to blow up power plants in Iran," said Abdi. "While this may be an attempt by the president to seize escalation dominance back from Iran, this notion is punctured by the fact that Iran would likely respond to such crimes with its own heinous attacks on power plants and civilian infrastructure in the region, upping the ante even further against the US, its partners, and the global economy."
"That’s why diplomacy is critical right now," Abdi added. "However, the president has severely undermined the US power of diplomacy as well. President Trump's past two attempts at diplomacy with Iran ended in surprise attacks by Israel, supported by the US, and has created the impression that the president uses talks as cover for Israel to launch military strikes. Unless the president is willing to seriously negotiate and can also restrain Israel from sabotaging an agreement, the war will continue and the possibility of escalation, whether by putting boots on the ground or committing war crimes, will take this war even further from a possible endpoint."
Keep Reading
Show Less
Rights Groups, Dems Warn of Disaster as Trump Sends ICE Agents to US Airports
“ICE and other federal agents have already shown the cost to us all when the president deploys them on his whim to act as a domestic policing force.”
Mar 23, 2026
Democratic lawmakers and civil liberties advocates are warning that President Donald Trump’s decision to send US Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers to airports across the country could have disastrous consequences, particularly given the agency’s deadly conduct on the ground in American cities in recent months.
Trump announced on Sunday that he would be sending ICE agents to airports to assist in security operations, as many Transportation Security Administration (TSA) workers have been either quitting or calling out amid a partial US government shutdown that has left them to work without pay.
Naureen Shah, director of policy and government affairs for immigration at the ACLU, expressed significant concerns about sending ICE to airpots, and she said it could further harm Americans' civil liberties.
"Never in our history has a president deployed armed agents to the airport to inspire fear among families," said Shah. "The American people don’t want to live in White House advisor Stephen Miller’s dystopian police state. ICE and other federal agents have already shown the cost to us all when the president deploys them on his whim to act as a domestic policing force."
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) also warned of potentially disastrous consequences from having ICE conduct airport security.
"ICE agents at airports will only aggravate delays and lines—disrupting checks, interrogating travelers, dragging parents from children, detaining citizens, brutalizing families, shooting, and even killing," he wrote. "Brutal, lawless tactics common in communities across the country by masked, unidentified agents, violating basic rights—no way to help TSA or travelers."
While Democratic lawmakers publicly condemn the move, journalist Rachel Bade reported on Monday that some Democrats believe that the optics deploying ICE agents at US airports will be terrible for the White House and will simply add to the chaos and turmoil experienced by American fliers.
"Great—do it!” one senior Democratic official told Bade. “Let’s fuck around and find out.”
A second Democratic source predicted to Bade that "armed agents at airports will crush tourism and freak people out," while a third sarcastically requested that the president send fully masked ICE agents to handle airport security.
Bade added that Democrats see the decision to send ICE agents to airports as a panic move by a White House that wants to try anything to get videos of long airport check-in lines out of the news.
Because of this, Bade said, they feel "emboldened" to further squeeze Republicans on making reforms to ICE.
"Democrats say the move shows they’re winning," wrote Bade. "In past shutdowns, presidents have tried to ramp up the pain during closures, thus putting pressure on the opposition party causing the shutdown. Here, Trump has done the exact opposite, seeking a workaround to alleviate concerns."
Democratic lawmakers aren't the only ones predicting Trump's ICE gambit will blow up in his face.
Everett Kelley, president of the American Federation of Government Employees, told NPR on Sunday that it was likely that ICE agents would make the situations at airports even worse.
"ICE agents are not trained or certified in aviation security," said Kelley, who added that TSA workers "deserve to be paid, not replaced by untrained, armed agents who have shown how dangerous they can be."
Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, senior fellow at the American Immigration Council, also welcomed the move to deploy ICE to airports, as he said it would leave fewer masked agents roaming the streets to round up immigrant families.
"To me, this does a lot more to slow down ICE than anything," he wrote in a social media post. "I'll take that deal."
Although Trump has tried to pin blame for chaos at US airports solely on Democrats, Punchbowl News reported that the president on Sunday shot down a proposal from Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) to fund all of the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) except for ICE, a move that would at least get TSA agents paid and end chaos at airports.
"Trump said no, according to multiple sources," wrote Punchbowl News. "The president wants Republicans to stay in DC and keep fighting with Democrats over DHS funding and the SAVE America Act, the GOP’s voter ID and proof-of-citizenship bill. Not only that, Trump warned that he’d publicly slam Senate Republicans if they left town for the upcoming recess."
Keep Reading
Show Less
Most Popular