- May 17, 2013
- 67,537
- 32,668
- 2,290
Justice Department Files Preemption Lawsuit Against the State of California to Stop Interference with Federal Immigration Authorities
AB 450 prohibits private employers from voluntarily cooperating with federal immigration officials—including officials conducting worksite enforcement efforts and other enforcement operations. It also requires that private employers notify employees in advance of a potential worksite enforcement inspection—despite clear federal law that has been on the books for approximately three decades that has no such requirements. An April 22, 2017, report on AB 450 compiled by the California State Assembly’s Committee on Judiciary states that the law is designed to frustrate “an expected increase in federal immigration enforcement actions.” California has demonstrated its intent to enforce this law: on Jan. 18, 2018, California Attorney General Becerra issued a warning to employers in the state that his office would “prosecute those who violate [AB 450] by voluntarily cooperating with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) efforts.” Additionally, failure to comply with AB 450 could result in a fine for the business owner ranging from $2,000-$10,000. California employers are thus caught between what many may feel is a civic duty to cooperate with the enforcement of federal law, and a state government that penalizes such lawful cooperation.
SB 54 restricts state and local law enforcement officials from providing information to federal immigration authorities about the release date of removable criminal aliens who are in their custody. These criminal aliens are subject to removal from the United States under federal immigration law, and SB 54 interferes with federal immigration authorities’ ability to carry out their responsibilities under federal law. SB 54 also violates 8 USC 1373, a law enacted by Congress, which promotes information sharing related to immigration enforcement. The state law also prohibits the actual transfer of criminal aliens to federal custody, which creates a dangerous operating environment for ICE agents executing arrests in non-custodial settings. In a declaration provided to the Court, ICE Deputy Director Thomas Homan states that these “at-large arrests. . .unquestionably involve a greater possibility of the use of force or violence by the target . . . and have greater access to weapons, exposing officers, the public, and the alien to greater risk of harm.”
Remarkably, with this law California attempts to shield from federal law enforcement removable criminal aliens who have committed crimes in the state of California and across the country. In doing so, California is releasing onto its streets those removable criminal aliens who have already shown a willingness to engage in criminal activity—as evidenced by their state or local detention for violating state law—and who therefore are most likely to commit crimes in the future.
AB 450 prohibits private employers from voluntarily cooperating with federal immigration officials—including officials conducting worksite enforcement efforts and other enforcement operations. It also requires that private employers notify employees in advance of a potential worksite enforcement inspection—despite clear federal law that has been on the books for approximately three decades that has no such requirements. An April 22, 2017, report on AB 450 compiled by the California State Assembly’s Committee on Judiciary states that the law is designed to frustrate “an expected increase in federal immigration enforcement actions.” California has demonstrated its intent to enforce this law: on Jan. 18, 2018, California Attorney General Becerra issued a warning to employers in the state that his office would “prosecute those who violate [AB 450] by voluntarily cooperating with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) efforts.” Additionally, failure to comply with AB 450 could result in a fine for the business owner ranging from $2,000-$10,000. California employers are thus caught between what many may feel is a civic duty to cooperate with the enforcement of federal law, and a state government that penalizes such lawful cooperation.
SB 54 restricts state and local law enforcement officials from providing information to federal immigration authorities about the release date of removable criminal aliens who are in their custody. These criminal aliens are subject to removal from the United States under federal immigration law, and SB 54 interferes with federal immigration authorities’ ability to carry out their responsibilities under federal law. SB 54 also violates 8 USC 1373, a law enacted by Congress, which promotes information sharing related to immigration enforcement. The state law also prohibits the actual transfer of criminal aliens to federal custody, which creates a dangerous operating environment for ICE agents executing arrests in non-custodial settings. In a declaration provided to the Court, ICE Deputy Director Thomas Homan states that these “at-large arrests. . .unquestionably involve a greater possibility of the use of force or violence by the target . . . and have greater access to weapons, exposing officers, the public, and the alien to greater risk of harm.”
Remarkably, with this law California attempts to shield from federal law enforcement removable criminal aliens who have committed crimes in the state of California and across the country. In doing so, California is releasing onto its streets those removable criminal aliens who have already shown a willingness to engage in criminal activity—as evidenced by their state or local detention for violating state law—and who therefore are most likely to commit crimes in the future.
