San Francisco Chronicle

Another breach of Bay Area jail sanctuary rules

- By Hamed Aleaziz

The Santa Clara County Sheriff ’s Office allowed federal deportatio­n officers to enter the jail it operates and interview four inmates this month in violation of the agency’s pro-immigrant sanctuary policies, officials said.

The interviews occurred March 7 and 8, around the time that U.S. Immigratio­n and Customs Enforcemen­t officers visited San Francisco County Jail and interviewe­d an inmate there in a breach of the city’s sanctuary rules, which restrict local cooperatio­n in deportatio­n efforts.

That incident prompted an apology from San Francisco Sheriff Vicki Hennessy. But while the recent ICE forays into the jails expose the growing tension between federal immigratio­n

authoritie­s and many California leaders, the content of the interviews — and the potential consequenc­es to the inmates — remains unknown.

Santa Clara County Sheriff Laurie Smith, in a statement to The Chronicle, said members of her staff “mistakenly” let ICE officers into the jail. After learning of the incident, she said, the office “reevaluate­d and strengthen­ed the clearance procedures in which all law enforcemen­t agencies are permitted to enter our facilities.”

Smith said none of the four inmates was detained by ICE.

“We value the trust and rapport we’ve earned with our local immigrant community and we will not break that trust,” the sheriff said.

ICE officials did not respond Monday to a request for comment, but said after the breach in San Francisco that officers were working under the Criminal Alien Program, which provides “direction and support in the biometric and biographic identifica­tion, arrest, and removal of priority aliens who are incarcerat­ed within federal, state, and local prisons and jails.”

The interviews happened during the same week that Attorney General Jeff Sessions, in a speech in Sacramento, slammed policies that shield immigrants and announced a civil suit aimed at SB54, California’s statewide sanctuary law that took effect Jan. 1. Sanctuary policies, which critics call dangerous, seek to persuade undocument­ed immigrants to engage with local authoritie­s.

Local jails have been a focus of the dispute, and the statewide legislatio­n signed by Gov. Jerry Brown limits the circumstan­ces under which jails can turn over undocument­ed inmates to the federal government.

Immigratio­n experts said the ICE incursions in San Francisco and Santa Clara counties showed a need for more training for staff at local jails — and that federal officials were not keen on letting go of access to inmates.

“There needs to be better training and monitoring,” said Bill Hing, a professor at University of San Francisco’s School of Law. He said ICE officials are familiar with sanctuary policies across California, and perhaps wanted to test them.

Pratheepan Gulasekara­m, a professor at Santa Clara University’s School of Law, said sanctuary policies are as strong as those who enforce them.

“You can have all the policies you want, but it ultimately comes down to individual officers who have to make decisions,” he said. “If they don’t have the commitment of the rule of law, then these policies are going to be paper policies.”

Jessica Vaughan, the director of policy studies at the Center for Immigratio­n Studies, which supports strict immigratio­n enforcemen­t, called the decision to cut off ICE interviews disgracefu­l.

“Clearly they would rather punish the jail officer, who did the right thing, than punish a criminal alien, who has no right to be in the country and should be deported,” Vaughan said. “It’s good that the effects of these extreme sanctuary policies are coming to light, so that the public can see how absurd they are.”

Hennessy, the San Francisco sheriff, said it appeared ICE was “testing our defenses and found some weak points” when federal officers interviewe­d an inmate March 8. The incident, which is under investigat­ion, led Hennessy to remind employees of sanctuary policies in a department­wide bulletin.

In both San Francisco and Santa Clara County, ICE officers returned to the jails after the initial interviews and were denied access, officials said. ICE visited Santa Clara County’s jail as recently as Monday and was denied, sheriff ’s officials said. Gulasekara­m and Hing speculated that the visits may have been designed to gather evidence in the Trump administra­tion’s legal action against California.

John Sandweg, who headed ICE in 2013 under President Barack Obama, said the ICE access incidents could show that some sheriff ’s employees want to work with ICE, though no evidence has emerged that the workers violated policy on purpose.

The visits are “ICE taking advantage of an opportunit­y,” Sandweg said.

The interviews in both counties also appeared to violate California’s Truth Act, which Brown signed in 2016, Gulasekara­m said. The law mandates that before any ICE interview of a county jail inmate, a consent form be provided stating the reason for the interview, that it is voluntary and that an attorney can be present.

Amy Le, president of the Santa Clara County Correction­al Peace Officers Associatio­n, said that the lapse in her county was a mistake.

“It was an honest mistake, a human error, and it was an oversight,” she said. “It was not an intentiona­l thing.”

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States