Several Cities—and the State of Colorado—Say No to the Border Police

When it comes to immigration
policy, the best-known clash between federal and lower levels of
government is the recent battle over Arizona’s infamous
SB 1070, a law that intensified the border clampdown. And there
have been plenty of other times a state
or city has
tried to be more heavy-handed in its immigration enforcement than
the feds. But sometimes it’s the more local jurisdiction that’s
less eager to crack down, as Emily Badger
points out in The Washington Post:

Chicago doesn’t cooperate.
Neither does
Philadelphia. Nor Baltimore,
San
Diego, Newark,

Milwaukee,
Miami-Dade or Denver.

One by one, these cities—soon to be
joined by New York City—have passed resolutions or enacted new
policies refusing to hand over immigrants detained by local police
to federal officials for deportation. The strategy, gaining
further momentum this year with a statewide
law in Colorado, is one way local governments dismayed by a
broken federal immigration system have found to undermine it.

At issue are what are called “immigration detainers.” The
federal government relies on local law enforcement agencies to help
identify individuals for deportation. When local police come in
contact with suspected immigrants (for reasons
ranging from
serious offenses to traffic violations), Immigration and
Customs Enforcement often issue a detainer, asking local jails and
prisons to hold them for 48 hours or more beyond their release to
give the feds time to decide if they want to collect and deport
them.

Badger mentions civil libertarian objections to the
imprisonments, and she also notes fears that these detentions will
undermine other sorts of police work. (People tend to be less
likely to help a homicide investigation if they’re afraid they’ll
be hauled in on immigration charges.) But the most important
incentive that she identifies might be financial: “The federal
government doesn’t reimburse local agencies for resources they
spend ‘holding’ suspected immigrants on ICE’s behalf.” Just as
governors with no ideological objection to regulation can suddenly
sound like fire-breathing libertarians when confronted with an
unfunded mandate, ICE’s orders can turn a moderate’s thoughts
toward defiance.

Bonus link: An earlier
example of immigration-friendly federalism.