Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Friday, March 13, 2009 | 2 a.m.
Related Document
Sun Archives
- Republicans' red herring (2-5-2009)
- State illegal immigrant hiring law won't work (5-22-2008)
- Need for workers spurs call for action (10-3-2008)
A recent congressional report questions whether Metro and police agencies nationwide are using a federally funded program to engage in wide-ranging deportation instead of its intended purpose, ridding communities of violent felons.
Other recent reports from advocacy and research groups say the so-called 287(g) program may give license to local law enforcement to profile Hispanics, and point out that a lack of clear data on outcomes makes it hard to determine whether the $60 million poured into the program is an efficient use of money.
The concerns have caught the eye of the Obama administration, which has called for a review.
Much of the criticism aimed at the program comes from there being a lack of data on who is being snared by the federal-local partnerships across the nation. Even the question of how many people have been deported through the program isn’t being answered.
In the absence of that information, critics say, the program could be spurring police profiling, which in turn can create a chilling effect on cooperation between Hispanic communities and police departments. Also, critics worry that the program is being used to deport immigrants who have committed minor crimes, when it is being sold as a deterrent to violent crime.
The partnerships exist in 67 jurisdictions. The program has been up and running at the Clark County jail since mid-November.
The American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada echoes the concerns indicated in the national reports and, in conjunction with other organizations, is set to make a formal records request about the arrangement between Metro Police and the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Department in the coming weeks.
Metro Lt. Rich Forbus, who oversees the program locally, says his department has numbers that show the program is working as intended, targeting “prolific criminals, people who are engaged in violent crimes, major crimes.”
Homeland Security spokesman Michael Keegan said his agency spent $74,000 on startup computer costs for the Metro program in fiscal year 2008 and spends $65,000 a year on ongoing computer costs. He couldn’t say how much was spent on the federal training for the 10 Metro officers who consult information in an ICE database when they interview selected inmates as they come into the Clark County Detention Center. The federal government then places “detainers” on those inmates it intends to deport after they have served their jail sentences.
Through mid-February, Metro found 1,297 Clark County Detention Center inmates in the U.S. illegally. Working with the police, immigration officials flagged slightly more than half of those inmates, 663, for possible deportation.
About two-thirds that number, 431, were charged with felonies or gross misdemeanors. The rest were charged with misdemeanors.
About half of the 1,297 inmates, 634, had little to no criminal history, so ICE did not place “detainers” on them, according to Forbus.
But while Metro contends that the numbers show the program is a success, analysts say there are unanswered follow-up questions that make it impossible to demonstrate unequivocally that the program is combating violent crime.
The Metro statistics don’t indicate, for example, whether inmates charged with felonies were actually convicted of those crimes. Also unknown is how many Clark County inmates ICE has deported as a result of this program — Forbus says Metro doesn’t keep those numbers, and Homeland Security doesn’t either.
Forbus says 272 of those under ICE “detainers” are still in Metro’s custody. If that means ICE deported the rest, nearly 400 inmates, then those inmates must have served little to no time, which is at the least confusing, because two-thirds of the group were charged with felonies or gross misdemeanors.
To Judith Greene, criminal justice analyst at New York-based Justice Strategies and author of another one of the recent reports examining 287(g), “the logic falls apart” when it comes to analyzing the effectiveness of the program, including in Las Vegas. Determining whether a given strategy reduces crime is complex, she says, and the principals involved in 287(g) haven’t spelled out what data should be kept to measure outcomes.
Forbus says he doesn’t have the resources to compile more data and would like to have civilian staff for that purpose. Still, “looking at it from the booking perspective, the program’s been very successful.”
Judy Cox of the Nevada ACLU recalls a January meeting of the local nonprofit organization Hispanics in Politics where Sheriff Doug Gillespie spoke about 287(g). Cox’s colleague, Executive Director Gary Peck, asked Gillespie about the absence of information on the outcome of cases and the inability to establish that the program is doing what it is supposed to do.
Gillespie said Metro would be forthcoming with information, challenging Peck to find a “more transparent” police department in the nation.
Cox says the records request her organization has in the works is meant to take Gillespie up on his offer.
Greene, of Justice Strategies, notes that Republican members of Congress testified last week that 287(g) was just fine as a way to have local and state police stand in for the federal government when it comes to immigration.
Democrats, meanwhile, understood that the program was worth supporting only as a law enforcement tool. “There is a lack of clarity a mile wide,” Greene says.
At the January meeting of Hispanics in Politics, the sheriff said Metro could “pull the plug” on 287(g) if it doesn’t work.
In the months to come, critiques of the program could force his hand.
If the people who are being arrested and deported are innocent of any crime I would agree that an investigation should be under way. If the people being arrested and deported have come into our country illegally they are getting exactly what they deserve. It's about time something is being done about this problem. However, our athorities should be open about the program.
I'm still curious...
exactly what would they have had to do to come in here legally. I mean is the process really just that horrible. I understand many wish to come in here and that there's a line, but I seem to deal with the huge lines at the DMV well enough.
While I appreciate what the ACLU is doing in trying to prevent race-based dragnets, it seems to me that being here illegally is no different than having a warrant for unpaid tickets or the like. No matter how minor the offense, if you have a warrant, and you get stopped by the police for any reason, you are going to jail. If you're an immigrant with illegal status, you always stand the chance of being deported. Que sera sera.
Sehr Gut Auslander. You do a crime, you pay the fine/time. When I speed I recognize that I should be pulled over and ticketed.
What's the big deal? Every last illegal alien is guilty of the crime of entering the country illegally or overstaying a visa. The ACLU can stick it where the sun don't shine.
Illegal aliens are criminals and parasites, one and all. Their very presence here and practically everything they do on U. S. soil is illegal. They need to be ferreted out, rounded up like cattle, punished for their numerous crimes, then booted back to whence they snuck in from with such extreme prejudice that they will never, ever think of violating our sovereignty again. Enough is enough.
AMEN and DITTO to all of the above :)
You can thank your favorite Senator, Reid, for allowing this to continue. Since he sunk the bill to re-authorize E-Verify you can expect this to go on and on. At one time he was all for deporting illegal's, then he got elected and changed his thinking to fall closer in line with the rest of the traitorous liberals. You might want to consider remembering this the next time he comes up for re-election if we don't end up with another amnesty before then.
The liberals don't care about the American citizen and if they have a job, all they care about is the votes they'll get when all the illegal's are given citzenship again.
So LadyM, all Liberal don't care about American citizens? That statement is so wrong I think I nearly vomitted. I know tons of liberals who hate illegal immigration. The liberals who are vocal for illegals are a minority, albeit a vocal one.
And considering I'm not up for office, I really have nothing to gain from their votes. Unless you mean making Spanish an official language in the Southwest? ohhh, wait, I'm against that too.
Leave it to the limousine liberal Greenspun and the Sun to find a program that actually results in the deportation of illegals, worthy of an expose.
Big surprise that the Great Teleprompter Reader is conducting an investigation, as well; can't lose that voting block of all the famously high-achieving anchor babies that those illegals continually crap out, can we?
Seriously though, here is a program that actually WORKS in the fight against the war on American language, culture and borders, and the good libs at the Sun are writing about it as if it's a bad thing.
Oh, but I forgot: None of these hypocrites has had the pleasure of living in what was once a nice,
solid middle class neighborhood known as east Las Vegas, now known as a third world toilet,
thanks to the very people this program seeks to deport.
Also, do members of the Greenspun family and their reporters send THEIR children to the public
schools on the east side? You know, the ones with huge overcrowding and replete with ESL
students who are here illegally, but whose education Greenspun et al would have them obtain on
YOUR taxpayer dime?
Yeah, I thought so. Because it's A OK for everyone else's kids to get shortchanged on their
education, which is exactly what illegals cause in the CCPSS, and exactly what this program, that is
obviously being decried, would eradicate.
Ask a Lib about ANY deportation program; border fence, workplace raids, eVerify (which, you should know, our illustrious senator Reid scuttled earlier this month), and I guaranty you that they will come up with a reason why NONE of them are acceptable.
I'm a lib Narc, and I'm for deportations.
Pop, pwnage.
Also anchor babies by definition are here legally.
It is worth noting that just yesterday the U.S. Dept. of Justice sent a formal notice to the office of "Sheriff Joe", Maricopa County, Arizona's most well know arrester and jailer of illegal immigrants. Sheriff Joe says that his deputies have been trained by ICE and they are following ICE's procedures. However, the Justice Department sees it differently, claiming that they are investigating the Maricopa County Sheriff's Department for a long list of violations of the "civil rights" of illegal aliens living, working and committing crimes in the county, which includes Phoenix. The essence of the investigation is a claim that the Maricopa County Sheriff's Department is "targeting" illegal aliens for law enforcement activities, and as a result the focus on those people constitutes a form of discrimination.
Apparently, the Justice Department was talked into undertaking the investigation at the request of the ACLA and groups advocating "day workers' rights" and "open borders".
Does anyone see a contradiction here? DOJ's ICE training sheriff's deputies and police officers and DOJ's Civil Rights division "investigating" those participating in ICE programs?
A Comment to LadyM: I have a strong feeling that the reason the Corporate Democrats like Harry Reid want the e-verify program ended is because the casino industry appears to profit from employing a massive number of people who do not speak English very well. It's obvious that employees who are here illegally are the most quiet, compliant work force available, in contrast to demanding English speaking, unionized workers. The big fear of businesses who profit from employing illegals is that e-verify would be made mandatory. If the program completely disappears, even though it was voluntarily used by employers, the risk of it becoming mandatory goes away.
A Comment to Narcissa: Your comment is one of the most pointed, factual, meaningful comments on a situation which I instinctively assumed exists. Keep making your comments whenever you can. However, there's one important point you should note: There is an old U.S. Supreme Court case called Plyler v. Doe which says that public schools cannot require evidence of legal residence or citizenship as a pre-requisite to allowing kids to enroll in school. The case bluntly says children cannot be denied a free, public education, even if they are here illegally. Every year, Congress appropriates "Plyler money" through the Department of Education to subsidize school districts which appear to have a high number of illegal immigrant students. Houston and Los Angeles are among the largest school districts receiving Plyler money. The only way to get rid of that Supreme Court decision is for the Congress and the requisite number of states to approve a Constitutional Amendment bluntly dealing with that opinion and negating it. However, this circles back to my main point, that Corporate Republicans and Corporate Democrats in Congress are never going to support such a Constitutional Amendment because the companies which employ illegal aliens would be wildly opposed to it, for fear that such an amendment would also be used to get rid of the cheap and compliant employees.
The ACLU are heroes in my book. Your comments here to the contrary are showing how ignorant you are of the bigger picture.
There is not a law that states that it is illegal to discriminate against an illegal. One has got to be an american citizen in order to be discriminated against. This so called discrimination is called protecting our borders.
The ACLU are your heroes??!! Can we house all the illegals in your doublewide Killer?
They are illegal. What part of illegal don't you understand?
We are not crossing the borders to collect them, they manage to come here illegally. The ACLU can go to hell.
getalife -- Since you don't know where or how I live, nothing else you say here has any credibility.
It's obvious I understand "illegal" far better than you. So you just keep on mooing with the rest of the herd. As in "how little does the common herd know of the nature of right and truth." (from Socrates in Plato's "Euthyphro" 380 B.C.E.)
Killer, I am glad you live "illegal", but does that justify letting all the illegal aliens just roam the streets with impunity?
I stand by my comment the ACLU is garbage.
Since I obviously hit a nerve with the "doublewide" remark I will retract it. Now you just need to get off your high horse and understand the word "illegal".
To you residents of Nevada---Why do you keep reelecting that POS traitor Reid? It's so obvious that he is putting illegal aliens ahead of his constituents. Why do you keep voting for people who s**t on you?
You have a 9% unemployment rate in Las Vegas as well as one of the highest foreclosure rates in the country. A few years back in Las Vegas, the law said that those who wanted to work in a food service job had to be checked for communicable diseases and had to show a valid SS card before being checked. When the hotels and restaurants threw a hissy fit, the powers that be backed off when it came to the SS card requirement. So...basically, they gave the hotels and restaurants a license to blatantly break the law. Now, with unemployment soaring, you have to ask yourself this---just how many illegals are currently working these jobs while Americans are desperately searching for work? How many of those illegals are using fraudulent IDs? Someone right now could be using your SS# and the SSA won't tell you about it. You only find out when the IRS starts demanding you pay taxes on income from a job you never held.
For the person who is fawning over the ACLU (an anti-American group if there ever was one)---the ACLU went to the Ninth Circuit Court to stop the "no-match" letters from getting sent out. Why? Because there was a 1 or 2 percent margin of error. Will the ACLU please tell us all, what, if anything, doesn't have some margin of error? What is perfect? Did you know that they deliberately went to the Ninth Circuit Court with their case because the Ninth is well known to be stacked with ultra liberal activist judges so the ACLU knew they would get the outcome they desired?
Think about that and think about that POS traitor Reid the next time you find an unemployed American who has exhausted his/her savings trying to pay the mortgage or rent and is desperately trying to find work. Then ask yourself just why you keep returning that POS Reid to office.
Do you find it acceptable that there is tent city in Reno filled with homeless American families who can't find work---all the while illegals are holding jobs? Recently, a Barnes and Noble warehouse in Reno was found to have 50 illegals in its employ.
Get angry, America! Think about what this country will be like for your descendants unless something is done about illegals. So many times I've read comments elsewhere from elderly people who say they're glad they're old and won't be around to watch the further destruction of our country---and that's sad.
So, LadyM, who to elect - Dem or Republican - BOTH parties protect illegals from being deported - NEITHER party wants to step up to the plate and ENFORCE the immigration laws - it's really quite simple - BOTH parties are in their 'pay back' mode - you know, the mode they kick into , at OUR expense, when it comes time to do favors for all those who contributed so heavily to their campaigns. You don't honestly believe anyone makes a campaign contribution without expecting some kind of favor in return, somewhere down the road. So before pointing the finger at Reid, Pelosi, Obama or any liberal please keep in mind that the conservation GOP is just as much at fault when it comes to harboring these illegal CRIMINALS - and yes, by their very nature being here illegally makes them a CRIMINAL. They should all be rounded up - put on a bus headed south with a couple extra gas cans so they don't even have to stop to refuel - just keep driving and don't stop till they cross the border.
Well, it is very simple. Anarchist groups like the ACLU want to gut the program. Obama, and even more so, the Reid/Pelosi regime running Congress, is sympathetic.
However, they have to weigh their ideology against the fact that if they gut what little enforcement we have of the immigration laws, especially in an economic depression, then their political careers will go up in smoke.
So I ask Harry Reid: Do you feel lucky?
Well do ya punk?
KillerB:
Well here's the "bigger picture" you seem to care about.
Lack of enforcement of the immigration laws, stimulated by extremist groups like the ACLU, lead to social anarchy.
In the inevitable counterreaction, the American people elect a right-wing strongman President.
So, if you think a right wing government is good for the US, then yes, you should love the ACLU.
SEN. Harry Reid, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the US Chamber of Commerce, ACLU and the open border lobby exactly what it wanted -- freedom for predatory businesses to continue to hire illegal aliens and receive the benefits from their illegal cheap labor. By killing E-Verify their would be no deterrent, to stop millions of illegal aliens taking the jobless Americans. 48 more Democrats sealed the fates of legal families losing homes, more debt collectors and even bankruptcy. Yet illegal aliens can always get---FREE HEALTH CARE, A FREE EDUCATION & other supplementary free social services. Even pre-and after natal services to new mothers. The predatory business that hires, pays no hospital, education and generally nothing? That's up to the US Taxpayer who is forced by government law. Why do you think the main leftist media don't want to publicize? They Say little about the Sanctuary cities or the spiraling crime rate.
REMEMBER! YOU ARE THE PEOPLE! DEMAND THE 40 MILLION ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS GO HOME! SELF-DEPORT USING THE E-VERIFY WASHINGTON MUST BE TOLD: We have till September to right this disgusting wrong, by demanding every politician revise--EVERIFY-- in perpetuity. Washington switchboard for your incensed calls to 202-224-3121
By the way:
The guy who said liberals support immigration enforcement is absolutely right.
Polls consistently show that.
The problem arises because some people don't understand the difference between liberals and leftists (or "progressives")
First of all, here's the rule of thumb:
Liberals are good, leftists are evil.
Liberals differ from conservatives in believing in a somewhat broader role for government in society, but they agree with the basic social philosophy that has evolved in the western world that the individual has fundamental rights.
One of those fundamental rights is the right to retain enough of the fruits of one's own labor that one can be economically independent and not a slave to the government.
Now, here's the weird part. Leftists differ from liberals simply in that leftists believe that the government should have an even bigger role in the economy. So how can liberals be good and leftists evil?
Because when the government becomes TOO large, then the individual loses his or her self-determination and becomes a slave to the government. Liberals do not cross that line, leftists do.
That is why, paradoxically, even though a leftist advocates policies that go further along the same spectrum than liberals do, there is a line that gets crossed along that spectrum where you go from good to evil, from the standpoint that the leftist gives such a big role to the government that the individual citizen is stripped of his or her autonomy, and becomes a slave of the state.
How does the ACLU fit in? Superficially, it claims to be a guardian of some of the principles of individual rights upon which our free society is based. In practice, it actually makes a mockery of those rights by ignoring their violation when it does not serve the ACLU's political agenda, while invoking those rights where they are not applicable, again, in order to advance its extremist political agenda.
So, anyway, for those who believe in enforcing the immigration laws,
DON'T BASH LIBERALS!
Because most of them are on our side.
It is only the extremist whack jobs on the far left who support immigration anarchy.
Unfortunately, Harry Reid and his ilk side with those extremists.
I don't live in Nevada, but could you guys get rid of that ahole next time he's up for re-election please?
Wish to see the future of this country absent immigration enforcement? Look southward. It's called Mexico.
Everything you need to know about immigration and what to do about it humorously told.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBw1nUlf3...
(Roy Beck and NumbersUSA are the "gumball" heroes)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7WJeqxuO...