This California Bill Would Restrict Immigration Enforcement in State Courts
A Los Angeles lawmaker says he'll pursue a bill in January that would bar federal immigration agents from arresting or questioning undocumented immigrants in state courthouses unless they first obtain a warrant.
September 11, 2017 at 05:58 PM
6 minute read
A Los Angeles lawmaker says he'll pursue a bill in January that would bar federal immigration agents from arresting or questioning undocumented immigrants in state courthouses unless they first obtain a warrant.
Democratic Sen. Ricardo Lara, Bell Gardens, introduced the new provisions in SB 183 late Friday, citing concerns raised by California Supreme Court Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye earlier this year that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials were using the secure buildings of California's trial courts to “stalk” and detain undocumented immigrants.
“As the California chief justice has said, 'Courthouses should not be used as bait' for immigrant enforcement, and the same is true for schools,” Lara said in a prepared statement.
The ICE ban would apply to any state-owned or state-leased building, including K-12 schools, community colleges and universities.
“Courthouses, schools and other state offices are a refuge for millions of the most vulnerable Californians, and immigrants should not be afraid to come to court or take their children to school,” Lara said.
Lara's late amendments to the bill, SB 183, suggested he was preparing to push through the legislation in the final hours of the legislative session, which ends at midnight Friday. On Monday he announced he will hold the bill until the Legislature reconvenes in 2018 “to work with stakeholders in the fall to move the bill forward in January.”
Cantil-Sakauye in March asked U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions and then-U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly to stop arresting undocumented immigrants in state courthouses, arguing that the activity was scaring away witnesses and litigants, including women seeking restraining orders.
Sessions and Kelly responded two weeks later, sharply rebuking the chief justice for accusing ICE agents of “stalking” immigrants. The U.S. officials blamed California and large counties from blocking access to suspects in prisons and jails.
ICE spokeswoman Virginia Kice said the agency could not comment on the pending legislation because it could be construed as improper lobbying. She reiterated previous comments that ICE agents make arrests in courthouses because their security screenings provide a safer environment for the public and officers.
A spokesman for judicial branch leaders said they had no position or comment on the bill.
California's Legislature and attorney general have regularly challenged Trump administration actions to crack down on immigration during his first eight months in office.
On Monday, Attorney General Xavier Becerra sued the U.S. Department of Homeland Security over the president's decision to rescind the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, or DACA. Also on Monday, Senate Leader Kevin de Leon, D-Los Angeles, announced that he and Gov. Jerry Brown reached agreement on so-called sanctuary state legislation that will limit local law enforcement agencies' cooperation with federal officials on immigration actions.
Related Articles:
|- Eric Holder's Advice to Jeff Sessions: Don't Force Career Staff to 'Defend the Indefensible'
- California's Chief Justice Raises New Alarms Over Immigration Arrests at Court
- Amid Arpaio Storm, Calif. Moves to Restrict Immigration-Status Disclosure
- Jeff Sessions Swipes Calif. Chief Justice for Accusing Feds of 'Stalking' Immigrants
- California Chief Justice Accuses Feds of 'Stalking' Immigrants at Courthouses
A Los Angeles lawmaker says he'll pursue a bill in January that would bar federal immigration agents from arresting or questioning undocumented immigrants in state courthouses unless they first obtain a warrant.
Democratic Sen. Ricardo Lara, Bell Gardens, introduced the new provisions in SB 183 late Friday, citing concerns raised by California Supreme Court Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye earlier this year that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials were using the secure buildings of California's trial courts to “stalk” and detain undocumented immigrants.
“As the California chief justice has said, 'Courthouses should not be used as bait' for immigrant enforcement, and the same is true for schools,” Lara said in a prepared statement.
The ICE ban would apply to any state-owned or state-leased building, including K-12 schools, community colleges and universities.
“Courthouses, schools and other state offices are a refuge for millions of the most vulnerable Californians, and immigrants should not be afraid to come to court or take their children to school,” Lara said.
Lara's late amendments to the bill, SB 183, suggested he was preparing to push through the legislation in the final hours of the legislative session, which ends at midnight Friday. On Monday he announced he will hold the bill until the Legislature reconvenes in 2018 “to work with stakeholders in the fall to move the bill forward in January.”
Cantil-Sakauye in March asked U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions and then-U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly to stop arresting undocumented immigrants in state courthouses, arguing that the activity was scaring away witnesses and litigants, including women seeking restraining orders.
Sessions and Kelly responded two weeks later, sharply rebuking the chief justice for accusing ICE agents of “stalking” immigrants. The U.S. officials blamed California and large counties from blocking access to suspects in prisons and jails.
ICE spokeswoman
A spokesman for judicial branch leaders said they had no position or comment on the bill.
California's Legislature and attorney general have regularly challenged Trump administration actions to crack down on immigration during his first eight months in office.
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 AllK&L Gates Looks to Extend Gen AI Expertise to Access to Justice Fight
9th Circuit Judge Chastises DOJ for 'Abrupt About-Face' in Case Challenging Asylum Policy
Why Fragomen Launched New Tools Amid Russia-Ukraine War
With New Leadership at the Helm, Expansion Remains Key at Berry Appleman
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Trump Nominates Ex-SEC Chief Jay Clayton to Helm Southern District of New York US Attorney's Office
- 2Steward Health CEO Saga Signals Escalation of Coercive Congressional Oversight Against Private Parties
- 3'They Should Have Tried to Negotiate': Jury Finds Against Insurer
- 4Expert Testimony Regarding Sexual Grooming
- 5Actions Speak Louder Than Words: Law Firms Shrink From 'Performative' Statements
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