Immigration Arrests at California Courthouse Expose Dilemma for Judges
For three years, Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye has pleaded with federal officials to stay away from state courthouses.
February 20, 2020 at 11:53 AM
4 minute read
Federal immigration agents arrested at least two allegedly undocumented men at a county courthouse in Santa Rosa on Tuesday in defiance of a state law meant to stop such detentions.
Sonoma County, California, District Attorney Jill Ravitch, Public Defender Kathleen Pozzi and County Counsel Bruce Goldstein issued a statement condemning the arrests by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, saying "they have the effect of scaring away witnesses and victims."
While the county officials said three people were detained Tuesday, one in a courthouse hallway and two more in the parking lot, an ICE spokesman said only two men, both Mexican nationals with prior convictions and past deportations, were arrested.
For three years, Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye has pleaded with federal officials to stay away from state courthouses. The arrests this week highlight the difficulties judges and court officials face as they grapple with conflicting federal and state laws governing immigrants in California courthouses.
Gov. Gavin Newsom signed legislation last year that gives judicial officers the authority "to prohibit activities that threaten access to state courthouses and court proceedings, and to prohibit interruption of judicial administration, including protecting the privilege from civil arrest at courthouses and court proceedings."
But it's unclear what practical power, if any, judges have to stop federal agents from making arrests in courthouses.
Before the law's enactment, California Attorney General Xavier Becerra issued model policies for courts interacting with ICE that recommended limiting disclosure of litigants' immigration statuses and using pseudonyms for immigrants "where feasible."
"In those model policies, the attorney general states that the state of California 'has a responsibility to provide safe and secure access to court facilities to all residents regardless of immigration status,'" B. Tam Nomoto Schumann, president of the California Judges Association, said in an email. "Courts have relied and will continue to rely on these model policies to ensure access to justice for all in California."
Courts aren't required to adopt policies about ICE activities, however, and the judicial branch does not track whether they have done so. Sonoma County Presiding Judge Bradford DeMeo did not return a message left at the courthouse Wednesday.
Federal immigration authorities say they're not bound by California's law in any case.
"California Assembly Bill 668 cannot and will not govern the conduct of federal officers acting pursuant to duly-enacted laws passed by Congress that provide the authority to make administrative arrests of removable aliens inside the United States," David Jennings, the San Francisco field office director for ICE, said in a statement. "Our officers will not have their hands tied by sanctuary rules when enforcing immigration laws to remove criminal aliens from our communities."
The arrests follow the Trump administration's recent announcement of an escalated crackdown on so-called sanctuary cities that limit cooperation with federal authorities seeking to detain undocumented immigrants.
The U.S. Justice Department sued New Jersey and King County, Washington, this month to block such policies. President Donald Trump also deployed tactical law enforcement units to major U.S. cities to help agents there with deportation efforts, The New York Times reported.
In 2017, city leaders declared Santa Rosa, home to the Sonoma County courthouse where the arrests took place, an "indivisible city." City employees are barred from enforcing federal immigration laws.
A spokesman for Cantil-Sakauye on Wednesday referred to the chief justice's previous statements criticizing the use of courthouses "as bait" by immigration enforcement officials.
Last year, a federal prosecutor charged a Massachusetts state judge with obstruction of justice for allegedly helping an undocumented immigrant slip out a back courthouse door to evade ICE agents.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllFrom 'Confusing Labyrinth' to Speeding 'Roller Coaster': Uncertainty Reigns in Title IX as Litigators Await Second Trump Admin
6 minute readNew Class Action Points to Fears Over Privacy, Abortions and Fertility
Trending Stories
- 1Judge Denies Sean Combs Third Bail Bid, Citing Community Safety
- 2Republican FTC Commissioner: 'The Time for Rulemaking by the Biden-Harris FTC Is Over'
- 3NY Appellate Panel Cites Student's Disciplinary History While Sending Negligence Claim Against School District to Trial
- 4A Meta DIG and Its Nvidia Implications
- 5Deception or Coercion? California Supreme Court Grants Review in Jailhouse Confession Case
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250