Washington state won't join U.S. immigration program (The Olympian)

Washington state won't join U.S. immigration program
Rights: Fingerprints would be checked in jails against database

LORNET TURNBULL; The Seattle Times | • Published November 30, 2010

Washington state has declined to sign an agreement that would allow the fingerprints of people booked into local jails to be checked against a national immigration database.

Immigration officials say the idea behind Secure Communities, a federal program rolling out across the country, is to identify, detain and eventually deport those subject to removal from the country, with a particular focus on those who have committed serious crimes.

But Secure Communities is controversial in some places where it operates, with immigrant advocates saying that it snags immigrants who’ve committed only minor offenses and could discourage people from reporting crimes to the police.

The program is in 788 jurisdictions across 34 states, including Oregon, Idaho and California, and in the past two years has led to the expulsion of some 46,800 individuals from the country.

The Department of Homeland Security, which runs Secure Communities through its Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) division, said it will be in every jail nationwide by 2013.

Over the last year, ICE has been trying to reach agreements with the agency in each state that serves as that state’s clearinghouse for fingerprint data. Any agreement with that agency would cover all local jurisdictions in the state.

In Washington, that agency is the State Patrol, which has chosen not to sign the agreement to activate Secure Communities here.

“We are a state law-enforcement agency, and we don’t want to go down the road of being an immigration agency,” Patrol spokesman Bob Calkins said. “The chief and the governor are of the same mind on this.”

A spokeswoman for Gov. Chris Gregoire said the governor has not yet made a “final determination.”

Calkins also said that while the State Patrol hasn’t signed the agreement, it won’t prevent local jurisdictions from doing so.

Ira Mehlman, spokesman for the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), which advocates for stronger immigration enforcement, said Washington’s position is wrongheaded political correctness.

Local authorities, he said, don’t refuse to cooperate with other federal law-enforcement agencies, such as the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives or the Drug Enforcement Administration.

“What possible justification can they have for not turning over this information that might be the one opportunity to catch someone who is really dangerous?” Mehlman asked. “They are just asking for some future tragedy.”

Those who advocate for immigrants and worked with the state in evaluating the program said there are still too many unanswered questions about how it works.

ICE, they say, falsely promotes this as a program that targets only serious criminals. In reality, they point out, the fingerprints of those who become naturalized citizens or obtain their green cards are also in the immigration database along with those who might have encountered immigration officers for any number of other reasons – and a traffic violation that results in their arrest might land them in deportation proceedings.

Jorge Barn, executive director of the Northwest Immigrant Rights Project, said there also are concerns about any chilling effect the program might have. “Whenever you get local law enforcement involved in immigration enforcement in this way, immigrant-community members become afraid of coming forward and reporting crime they may have witnessed or been a victim to,” he said.

ICE officials say there’s no evidence that’s happening and point out that only the fingerprints of people who have been arrested are submitted for screening.

ICE is phasing the program in, county by county, as it builds its infrastructure over the next few years, with immediate activation in those jurisdictions with the largest caseloads.

But it is facing pushback in some places.

In at least two jurisdictions in California, where the state’s Department of Justice has signed the agreement with ICE, officials have inquired about opting out of participation.

San Francisco says the program violates its status as a sanctuary city, which forbids cooperation with ICE unless mandated by law.

ICE now says communities may not opt out, after earlier saying they would be allowed to. Secure Communities expands on a program ICE already operates across the country that allows its officers to check the names of people who’ve been booked into jails and prisons against ICE’s national database.

ICE then places a detainer on those deemed deportable, requesting that local law enforcement hold them for up to 48 hours until an ICE officer can pick the person up.