8-05-09, 9:03 am
Original source: The Atlanta Progressive News
(APN) LILBURN -- About 200 citizens gathered at Our Lady of the Americas Catholic Mission in Gwinnett County Saturday, August 01, 2009, to share and discuss racial profiling issues and local enforcement of federal civil immigration laws.
Advocates claim that racial profiling, particularly under the controversial 287(g) program, persists, despite efforts by US Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MS) and others to modify the program in recent months.
The Know Your Rights/Tell Your Story forum, cosponsored by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Georgia and Atlantans Building Leadership for Empowerment (ABLE), gave those in attendance a chance to share horror stories about encounters with local law enforcement and to learn their rights.
Several Hispanic citizens shared emotional stories of encounters with local law enforcement that included incidents of verbal abuse and allegations of harassment and civil rights violations. Many said they felt embarrassed and afraid after encounters.
Dr. Rene Gonzalez, 73, said an officer pulled him over in Buford a few weeks ago for wearing a red t-shirt that said “Mexico” on it. Gonzalez told the officer that he was going home but the officer allegedly said, 'No, your home is in Mexico.'
'The ironic part is I was born, raised, and educated in this country,' Gonzalez said.
Representatives from the ACLU of Georgia set up a table Saturday and listened to testimonials like these. The group promised to compile what they hear into a human rights report with the ultimate goal of passing anti-racial profiling legislation in the Georgia General Assembly.
Some lawmakers have tried to push such legislation through in past Sessions with little success. State Sen. Gloria Butler (D-Stone Mountain) first introduced such legislation in 1999. It passed the Senate but stalled in the House because, Butler said, other lawmakers loaded it with amendments.
'You would think we would have moved away from racial profiling issues,' Butler told the audience Saturday. 'Instead of moving away, it keeps building up and building up.'
Butler, who serves as the Deputy Minority Whip, last sponsored anti-profiling legislation in 2005 (SB 148) but promised to introduce a bill during the 2010 Session. 'Sometimes I’m out there working by myself but that’s what it takes,' she said.
Other lawmakers have taken up the mantle in recent years. State Rep. Tyrone Brooks (D-Atlanta) sponsored HB 53 in 2009 while State Rep. Pedro Marin (D-Duluth) sponsored HB 110.
While the two bills are numbered differently, the bills strive to obtain similar goals. Anti-profiling legislation would prohibit law enforcement officers from impermissibly using race or ethnicity in determining whether or not to stop a motorist.
The bills would require annual training of law enforcement officers on impermissible uses of race and ethnicity in stopping vehicles and require officers to document the race, ethnicity, and gender of a motorist and passengers.
'The Georgia Legislature, rather than building bridges, is building walls and we need to stop that,' Marin said Saturday.
'There are many that don’t think this issue is an issue,' Butler added. 'They think racial profiling is OK and it’s not.'
THE 287(g) PROGRAM ABLE and the ACLU of Georgia decided to hold the forum after the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced July 10 Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has standardized a Memorandum Of Agreement (MOA) to enter into so-called 287 (g) programs with 11 law enforcement jurisdictions, including the Gwinnett County Sheriff’s Department.
As previously reported by Atlanta Progressive News, Section 287 (g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act allows deputies, under the supervision of ICE agents, to place “detainers” on inmates who are in the United States illegally. Once identified, those inmates are turned over to the ICE for deportation proceedings.
Adelina Nichols of the Georgia Latino Association for Human Rights (GLAHR) said Saturday the program’s impact 'has been tremendous and hurtful to Latino communities.'
Proponents argue the program enhances immigration enforcement nationwide.
'The 287(g) program is an essential component of DHS’ comprehensive immigration enforcement strategy,' ICE Assistant Secretary John Morton said in a July 10 press release. 'The new agreement strengthens ICE’s oversight of the program and allows us to better utilize the resources and capabilities of our law enforcement partners across the nation.'
US Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MS), Chairman of the US House Committee on Homeland Security, also praised the program changes.
'In March 2009, the Committee on Homeland Security held an oversight hearing to expose the gaping deficiencies in the 287(g) program. That hearing revealed that the precipitous growth in the 287(g) program had caused the program to dangerously morph beyond its original boundaries and led to a lack of accountability. Under the previous Administration, ICE’s failure to provide leadership permitted local officials to define the mission and goals of this Federal program,' Thompson said in a press release sent to APN.
'I am gratified that this Committee’s oversight led the Department to revamp the 287(g) program. This $60 million initiative was intended to allow local law enforcement authorities to remove dangerous aliens. With the proper training and supervision, these local peacekeepers could have been a potent force multiplier. Unfortunately, this opportunity was squandered and the previous Administration allowed popularity to become a replacement for documented performance and constitutional principles.'
'The reforms that DHS announced today will bring this program back in line with its original statutory purpose and Congressional intent. I commend the Secretary for her leadership and look forward to continuing to work together to bring about other necessary reforms within this Department,' Thompson said.
Bur advocates claim the changes have not been meaningful.
The Gwinnett County Sheriff’s Department applied for the program in March 2008 and received the support of the Gwinnett County Commission in funding 18 deputy positions in order to implement the program.
On Jan. 12, 2009, the Sheriff’s Department and the ICE began a 26-day 'surge' at the county jail to check the immigration status of all inmates.
At the end of the 26 days, the ICE placed detainers on 914 foreign-born inmates. Of the 914 inmates, 54 percent had a previous criminal record, according to the Sheriff’s Department. The county determined that 68 percent of its foreign-born inmates were here illegally.
'This is a program that has been much needed here in Gwinnett County because we have such a large population of illegal aliens from countries around the world living here,' Gwinnett Sheriff Butch Conway said in a July 13 statement. 'It is unfortunate that not all of our population has chosen to abide by our immigration laws. Now, we will have an avenue when someone is arrested to check their immigration status and place a hold on them for deportation if they are not here legally.'
Officials are not sure when the program is expected to start because the Sheriff’s Department is still working on the MOA with DHS and ICE. The county will also have to hire 18 new deputies to replace those manning the program.
If completed, Gwinnett would become the fifth agency in Georgia to use the program. Three counties' Sheriff's Departments--Cobb, Hall, and Whitfield Counties--in addition to the Georgia Department of Public Safety are already using the program.
There are reports, however, that have found the ICE is not exercising proper oversight over local jurisdictions.
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report in March that found several program flaws and made recommendations to DHS.
'Program objectives have not been documented in any program-related materials, guidance on how and when to use program authority is inconsistent, guidance on how ICE officials are to supervise officers from participating agencies has not been developed, data that participating agencies are to track and report to ICE has not been defined, and performance measures to track and evaluate progress toward meeting program objectives have not been developed,' the report states.
The GAO found more than half of the 29 state and local enforcement agencies reviewed had received complaints about how officers are using the 287 (g) program, including reports of racial profiling.
'Taken together, the lack of internal controls makes it difficult for ICE to ensure that the program is operating as intended,' the report notes. 'ICE and participating agencies used program resources mainly for personnel, training, and equipment, and participating agencies reported activities and benefits, such as a reduction in crime and the removal of repeat offenders.'
The national ACLU made a Congressional request and multiple Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) requests to obtain and review the new MOAs issued by DHS.
After reviewing the agreements, the ACLU determined that any changes the DHS has made to the 287 (g) program have little or no effect.
'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,' the national ACLU said in a July 17 press release.
'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,' the ACLU said.
'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,' the ACLU said.
--Jonathan Springston, a Senior Staff Writer for Atlanta Progressive News, is reachable at
