Police Chiefs and Sheriffs Speak OutOn Local Immigration Enforcement

CRITICAL ISSUES IN POLICING SERIES:

CRITICAL ISSUES IN POLICING SERIES:

Police Chiefs and Sheriffs Speak OutOn Local Immigration Enforcement

April 2008

This publication was supported by the Motorola Foundation. The points of view expressedherein are the authors' and do not necessarily represent the opinions of the MotorolaFoundation or individual Police Executive Research Forum members.

Websites and sources listed provide useful information at the time of this writing, butauthors do not endorse any information of the sponsor organization or other informationon the websites.

Police Executive Research Forum, Washington, D.C. 20036Copyright 2008 by Police Executive Research Forum

All rights reserved

Printed in the United States of America

ISBN: 978-1-934485-05-7

Edited by Craig Fischer

Cover and interior design by Dave Williams. Cover photos depicting protest rally,community meeting, and police training session courtesy of the Prince William County, Va.Police Department. Other cover photos courtesy of U.S. Immigration and CustomsEnforcement.

Acknowledgments............................................. i

Foreword......................................................... iii

Introduction..................................................... 1

Some Immigration Basics ............................... 3

State and Local ActionOn a National Issue ......................................... 5

Why Is Illegal Immigration Such a “Hot-Button” Topic? ............................ 8

Most State and Local JurisdictionsLack Written Policies on Immigration ......... 11

What Are the RelationshipsBetween Illegal Immigrants And Crime? .................................................... 12

Illegal Immigrants as Victims Of, and Witnesses to, Crime ......................... 14

If Local Police Enforce Immigration Laws, Will Illegal Immigrants Be Even Less Likely to Report Being a Victim of Crime? ........................................... 15

What Are the Current PoliciesAnd Practices of Local LawEnforcement Agencies?.................................. 17

Should Immigration StatusBe Checked for Minor Offenders?................ 19

“Probable Cause” and a Cloudy Legal Picture ..................................... 20

Working with Immigration andCustoms Enforcement (ICE) ........................ 22

Participation in the 287(g)Program Is Small, But Growing.................... 25

Should Illegal ImmigrantsBe Allowed to ObtainOfficial Driver’s Licenses orOther Identification Credentials? ................. 27

The Need for a Federal Policy....................... 30

There Are Some Points ofGeneral Consensus ........................................ 32

Conclusion ..................................................... 33By PERF Executive Director Chuck Wexler

About the Police ExecutiveResearch Forum ............................................. 36

About the Motorola Foundation .................. 38

Appendices

A. Major Cities Chiefs ImmigrationCommittee Recommendations forEnforcement of Immigration Laws By Local Police Agencies ............................... 39

B. Prince William County,Virginia, Police Department’s General Order on Law EnforcementResponse to Illegal Immigration................... 50

C. 287(g) Memorandum of AgreementBetween Immigration and CustomsEnforcement (ICE) and the CollierCounty, Florida Sheriff ’s Department.......... 59

Contents

D. Mesa, Ariz. Police Field Manual,Subject: Arrest—Undocumented Foreign Nationals .......................................... 77

E. Gilbert, Ariz. General Order onContacts with Immigration andCustoms Enforcement ................................... 81

F. Virginia Beach, Va. PoliceDepartment General OrderRegarding Enforcement ofImmigration Laws ......................................... 83

G. Washington, D.C. MetropolitanPolice Department, StatementBy Chief Cathy L. Lanier Clarifying MPD Policy withRespect to Collaboration withFederal Immigration Authorities.................. 87

H. Indio, Calif. Police Department Policy 428: Immigration Violations............. 90

I. New Haven, Conn. DepartmentOf Police Service General Order 06-2,Re. Disclosure of [Citizenship] Status:Policies and Procedures................................. 94

J. Seattle Police DepartmentDirective: Inquiries intoImmigration Status........................................ 98

K. Garden Grove, Calif.Police Department, GeneralOrder 17.3: Immigration Violations .......... 100

L. Milwaukee Police DepartmentImmigration Enforcement Policy............... 104

M. Chilling Effect and the Enforcement of Immigration Law.............. 108

By Collier County, Fla. Sheriff Don Hunter

N. Participants at the PERF Immigration SummitWashington, D.C., November 2, 2007 ........ 115

PERF’S IMMIGRATION SURVEY WOULD NOT HAVE

produced useful findings, and our ImmigrationSummit would not have been possible, without thestrong cooperation of our member chiefs, sheriffs,and other law enforcement executives. I am gratefulto the members of PERF for their constant willing-ness to provide us with information when we askfor it, to make time in their busy schedules to travelto our Summit conferences, and to share their wis-dom with us on the critical issues in policing.

I’d like especially to thank several friends ofPERF who helped write and test our immigrationsurvey in order to ensure that it zeroed in on thekey issues: Chief Charlie Deane (and Sgt. EileenWelsh) of Prince William County, Va.; Chief DarrelStephens of Charlotte-Mecklenburg, N.C.; ChiefKim Dine of Frederick, Md.; Chief Jim Burack ofMilliken, Colo.; Deputy Director Craig Ferrell ofHouston; Chief Al Najera of Sacramento, Calif.;and Chief Gil Kerlikowske of Seattle. Thanks also tothe many police departments that sent us copies oftheir immigration policies.

Thanks also to Chief Darrel Stephens and toJim Pendergraph, a former sheriff and now Execu-tive Director of State and Local Coordination atICE, for reviewing a draft of this report and sharingtheir expertise with us.

And of course PERF’s work on the immigra-tion issue, like all of our initiatives in the “CriticalIssues in Policing” Series, is made possible by thecontinued generous assistance of the MotorolaFoundation. A special thank-you goes to GregBrown, President and CEO of Motorola; MarkMoon, Corporate Vice President and General Man-ager; Gino Bonanotte, Vice President, Finance;Eileen Sweeney, Director, Corporate and Founda-tion Philanthropic Relations; and Rick Neal, Vice

President, Government Strategy and BusinessDevelopment, who champions the Critical Issues inPolicing Series and who came to Washington toparticipate in the Summit.

I also would like to recognize Chief CharlieDeane, for whom I have enormous respect. Heinspired us to study this complex question of immi-gration enforcement.

Many PERF staffers contributed to the successof this project, starting with my indefatigable chiefof staff, Andrea Luna, who provided overall direc-tion along with her dedicated research associate,Elizabeth Sanberg. Our Senior Research AssociateBruce Kubu, Senior Associate Jim Cronin, andResearch Assistant Nate Ballard did a terrific jobcompiling and analyzing the mountains of dataproduced by the survey. Emily Milstein-Greengart,Amanda Detterline, and Rebecca Neuburger madesure the Immigration Summit ran smoothly so thatparticipants could devote themselves to the difficultissues under discussion. Freelance writer DebraWhitcomb pulled together all of the informationand viewpoints from the survey and the Summit,and did an excellent job of synthesizing it into thisreport. And Craig Fischer deserves special appreci-ation once again for making sense of this issue andfor working with Debra and with PERF’s talentedgraphic design guru, Dave Williams, to produce thefinal document.

Acknowledgments — i

Acknowledgments

Executive DirectorPolice Executive Research ForumWashington, D.C.

ii — Acknowledgments

SOMETIMES WE AT PERF HAVE TO THINK HARD WHEN

we try to identify the emerging issues in policingthat we believe will be the most important or diffi-cult problems for police chiefs and sheriffs in thefuture. Often it isn’t easy to predict the future accu-rately and to say with any certainty, “Here is some-thing that will be occupying the attention ofthousands of police executives next year, or twoyears from now.”

The immigration issue is not one of thoseissues that remained hidden and then surfaced sud-denly and unexpectedly. The immigration issue is afreight train that has been barreling down thetracks toward us for some time, whistle blaring.Here’s one example of what I mean by that: Formore than a year, anyone who has been attendingPERF’s Town Hall Meetings, where police chiefsand other leaders are invited to speak out on anyissue they choose, cannot help but have noticed thatthe immigration issue spontaneously becomes thehot-button issue whenever there is an open forumof police leaders.

I’ve also noticed that at our meetings, chiefs,sheriffs, and others express differing views aboutwhat the immigration issue means in their jurisdic-tions, but the range of opinions is relatively limited,compared to the shout-fests that you see on TVnews and opinion programs.

Some chiefs do not believe that local law en-forcement agencies should spend much of their lim-ited resources to take on what has essentially beenthe federal responsibility for illegal immigration enforcement in our communities. And many areconcerned that tougher immigration enforcementon the local level will threaten the advances we havemade in community policing over the last 20 years.

Some chiefs and sheriffs point to facts andfigures indicating that illegal immigrants commit asizeable portion of their local crimes, and thesepolice executives think they have no choice but towork as closely as they can with federal authoritiesto arrest, prosecute, incarcerate, and eventuallydeport these offenders. For these chiefs, immigra-tion enforcement is a primarily a matter of localcrime control and public safety.

On the immigration issue, as with so manyother issues, I have noticed that police leaders’views are far more reasonable, measured, based onsolid facts, and “grounded in reality” than the viewsof so many of the pundits and elected officials thatyou hear on the airwaves.

Unfortunately, often the most extreme viewsare expressed by everyday people at local city coun-cil meetings and other public hearings. It seemsthat the exaggerated and overwrought opinionsexpressed by TV pundits or politicians get“adopted” by their listeners, and then these immod-erate views become the basis of discussion at thepublic forums where real policies are hammeredout.

Often I wish that when the American peopletake up a difficult issue like immigration, the views ofpolice chiefs and sheriffs would receive a larger shareof the attention, commensurate with the knowledgeand wisdom that police executives have gained fromworking on the front lines of many of the nation’smost difficult problems for so many years.

Perhaps this report can take us a step in thatdirection, by providing a base of information aboutwhat police and sheriffs’ departments currently aredoing regarding immigration enforcement, alongwith a reporting of police executives’ views on the

Foreword — iii

Foreword

issue, the views they expressed to each other at arecent Summit meeting convened by PERF.

Specifically, PERF conducted a survey of itsmembers in October 2007, in which we asked policeexecutives whether illegal immigration was a high-profile issue in their jurisdiction, whether theirdepartment has written policies on immigrationenforcement, what their practices are regardingchecking the immigration status of arrestees andothers, whether they work with federal authoritiesfrom Immigration and Customs Enforcement(ICE), and many other questions.

The survey produced an introductory base ofknowledge about immigration enforcement at thelocal level. For example, most of the survey respon-dents reported a perception that the number of ille-gal immigrants arriving in their jurisdiction hasincreased “substantially” over the last five years.However, a large majority said their departmentshad no written policy on checking people’s immi-gration status. Despite this lack of written policies,most departments said they do conduct immigra-tion status checks under certain circumstances.

PERF followed up its survey by hosting anImmigration Summit on November 2, 2007 inWashington, D.C. Police chiefs, sheriffs, mayors,

federal officials, and others convened to compareinformation about how the hot-button immigra-tion issue is playing out in their jurisdictions, andwhat they are doing to shape the direction of poli-cies in their communities.

This report summarizes what we learnedfrom the PERF Immigration Survey and theNovember Summit meeting. And we attempted to go beyond summarizing the various officials’experiences and recommendations. To the extentpossible, we tried to find areas of consensus, wherethere was strong general agreement among thePERF chiefs and sheriffs. This report looks to build on these points of consensus in order to pro-vide guidance to the many chiefs and sheriffs whowill be addressing immigration issues in their communities.

It is clear that the immigration issue will not go away any time soon. Rather, it appears that thou-sands of American communities are just beginningto ask themselves how they want their local policeand sheriffs’ departments to handle the immigrationquestion. We hope that this report will help informthese debates, and will serve as a launching pad forfurther discussion of immigration-related questionswithin the policing community.

iv — Foreword

Chuck Wexler

Introduction — 1

ACROSS THE COUNTRY, IN COMMUNITIES LARGE AND

small, residents and policy makers are grapplingwith the issues raised by a population of immigrantswho have entered the United States illegally. Forstate and local police and sheriffs’ departments, themain issues are the extent to which they should beinvolved in inquiring about immigration status dur-ing encounters on the street, reporting non-criminalillegal immigrants to federal authorities, and other-wise helping to enforce federal immigration laws.Most police departments have traditionally consid-ered immigration law a federal responsibility. In-deed, the federal government has clear authority

over immigration enforcement, while the authorityof local police in this area is a complicated legalissue, largely because federal immigration laws haveboth criminal and civil components, and the role of local police is generally limited to criminal mat-ters. State and local laws place additional layers ofcomplexity on the question of the role of local po-lice in this area.

However, local political leaders increasinglyare asking local police departments to take a largerrole in immigration enforcement, and state andlocal governments have been adopting varying andsometimes conflicting policies.

Introduction

“We need a rational, logical, thoughtful policy, some kind of bright line by which policedepartments can operate. I think there’s general agreement in law enforcement that oncesomeone is arrested for an offense, it makes sense to check their immigration status, just aswe would check to see if there was an outstanding warrant from some other state. Becausethis takes place on the ‘back end,’ after the person has been arrested and is in jail, it obviatescomplaints of racial profiling and discrimination, and focuses on lawbreakers. On the otherhand, I think we can all agree, from what we have heard from ICEofficials, that if everyone who’s arrested and determined to behere illegally were turned over to ICE, they could not handle theworkload.

“What is missing is a sensible national policy with a standard-ized approach regarding immigration, including defined sanc-tions for illegal immigrants who commit various crimes. Withoutsuch a policy, we spin our wheels and end up in the middle of apolitical debate that seems to generate hate and fear. This is notproductive, because most local departments continue to believethat building trust and communication with all of our communi-ties, especially our minority communities, is a key component ofeffective and enlightened policing.”

—F R E D E R I C K, M D. C H I E F K I M D I N E

In October 2007, the Police Executive ResearchForum (PERF) surveyed its members to learn theirperspectives on the nature and magnitude of theproblem, its impact on their communities, and theactions their departments are taking. PERF then fol-lowed up by convening a one-day Summit confer-ence of 69 police chiefs, sheriffs, and other lawenforcement executives, representing a cross-sectionof the PERF membership, along with nine of theirlocal officials (mayors, town managers, and countyexecutives), and federal government officials andothers. The goals of the Summit, held on November2, 2007 in Washington, D.C., were to articulate theissues facing police departments today, to identifyareas of consensus, and to highlight promising poli-cies and practices.

This report summarizes the experiences,observations and recommendations that emergedfrom the survey and the Summit.

2 — Introduction

Tom Wolfe attended the Summit at the invitation of Chief John Timoney. Mr. Wolfe, author of The Right Stuff, The Bonfire of the Vanities, The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test, and other best-sellers, isconducting research for a book about immigration.

Some Immigration Basics — 3

THE DIVISIVENESS OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION AS A

political issue is reflected in the fact that the termsused in the debate are themselves sensitive andpolitically charged. The term “alien” is used in thefederal Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) torefer simply to “any person not a citizen or nationalof the United States.” This includes temporary visi-tors and lawful permanent residents. “Illegal alien”refers to anyone who has entered the United Statesillegally and is deportable, or anyone who has“overstayed a visa” or otherwise violated the termsof a legal admission.

However, the terms “alien” and “illegal alien”have come to have a political meaning as well.Those in favor of strict enforcement of immigra-tion laws often use the terms to emphasize that people are breaking the law. Those favoring morelimited enforcement tend to avoid using thosewords, saying that “alien” has a connotation of“less than human” and that calling a person “illegal”suggests that the person is inherently illegal, asopposed to the illegality of a person’s actions inentering the United States without permission.Those who avoid saying “illegal alien” often preferthe term “undocumented immigrant.” Advocates ofstrict policies consider that term a euphemism.

The term “illegal immigrant,” which will gen-erally be used in this report, includes several cate-gories of individuals who are subject to removalfrom the United States for a variety of reasonsdefined by the federal Immigration and NationalityAct. In general, an individual may be considered

“removable” because he or she does not qualify foradmission to the United States, has entered thecountry illegally by crossing the border without for-mal inspection, or has violated the terms of a legaladmission, for example, by entering the country ona student visa and then dropping out of school.1

A key point that is critical to understandingthe issues for local police is that the Immigrationand Nationality Act is a very complex mix of bothcriminal and civil components. Being illegally pres-ent in the United States is a civil, not criminal, vio-lation of the INA, and subsequent deportationprocesses are civil proceedings. For example, law-fully admitted persons may become deportable iftheir visitor’s visa expires. Criminal violations ofthe INA can include the illegal entry of aliens,bringing and harboring certain undocumentedaliens, and the reentry of persons who have alreadybeen deported on one or more occasions.

Persons who are identified as illegal immi-grants may be brought before the ImmigrationCourt for a removal proceeding. Individuals who failto appear for this proceeding, or who fail to complywith a resulting court order, are considered abscon-ders. Their identifying information is then enteredinto the National Crime Information Center (NCIC)database, which is routinely accessed by federal, stateand local law enforcement agencies across the coun-try to check for outstanding warrants. NCIC entriesinclude both civil and criminal violations of immi-gration laws. A federal immigration “warrant” maybe an administrative, or civil, document.

Some Immigration Basics

1. Executive Office for Immigration Review, FY 2006 Statistical Yearbook, Appendix A, Glossary, p. 16.

4 — Some Immigration Basics

The key federal agency in this area, Immigra-tion and Customs Enforcement (ICE), was createdin March 2003 as part of the newly establishedDepartment of Homeland Security (DHS). ICE isthe largest investigative arm of DHS, and its mis-sions include enforcing immigration laws and pro-tecting the United States against terrorism.

On September 30, 1996, the Illegal Immigra-tion Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Actadded Section 287(g),“Performance of immigrationofficer functions by State officers and employees,” tothe Immigration and Nationality Act. Section287(g) cross-designates local law enforcement offi-cers, detectives, investigators and correctional offi-cers to perform some immigration enforcementactivities, provided that the officers have receivedappropriate training and that they function underthe supervision of sworn ICE officers.2

ICE administers the Law Enforcement Sup-port Center (LESC), which provides informationfrom NCIC and other databases (the Interstate

Identification Index, the Student and Exchange Vis-itor Information System, other ICE databases, etc.)to state and local law enforcement officers aboutforeign nationals (persons who are not U.S. citizensor permanent residents) whom they encounter intheir daily duties. LESC operates 24 hours a day,365 days a year. In the 2007 fiscal year, LESCreceived 728,243 requests for information, setting anew record for assistance to other law enforcementagencies, according to ICE.

ICE investigates violations of immigrationlaws and identifies illegal immigrants who areremovable from the United States. In the 2007 fiscalyear ICE removed 276,912 illegal aliens from theUnited States, a record high number, according tothe agency’s annual report.3 As a result, ICE wasable to reduce the backlog of fugitive alien cases forthe first time in history, from 632,726 on October 1,2006 to 594,756 on October 1, 2007. On an averageday, ICE houses nearly 30,000 illegal aliens indetention facilities nationwide.

2. http://www.ice.gov/partners/287g/section287_g.htm.3. See http://www.ice.gov/doclib/about/ice07ar_final.pdf.

State and Local Action on a National Issue — 5

ACCORDING TO THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND

Security, Office of Immigration Statistics, the num-ber of illegal immigrants in this country is growingsteadily, from an estimated 8.5 million in 2000 to10.5 million in 2005 and nearly 11 million by Janu-ary 2006.4 Mexico was by far the leading sourcecountry, followed by El Salvador, Guatemala, Indiaand China.5 To date, most illegal immigrants havesettled in California, Texas, and Florida; but Geor-gia, Arizona, Nevada and North Carolina experi-enced the greatest percentage increases from 2000to 2005.6

In June 2007, the Bush Administration intro-duced legislation with several strategies to addressillegal immigration: tightening security at the bor-ders; cracking down on employers who knowinglyhire undocumented workers; establishing a legalmechanism for the hundreds of thousands ofworkers who enter the country each year to fill low-skill jobs; and providing a path to legal statusfor illegal immigrants now living in America.Congress failed to pass this bill, however, due toconflicts between those who favored stronger border enforcement and those who favored offeringa path to citizenship.

Because federal lawmakers have been unableto set policy for the nation, state legislatures and localcouncils have been adopting various immigration

policies and programs, in response to increasingdemands for action by local constituents. In thefirst six months of 2007 alone, 41 states passed newlegislation related to immigrants and immigration.7

The national picture can perhaps best be describedas a “crazy quilt,” running the gamut from requiringlocal police departments to enforce federal immi-gration law, to expressly prohibiting local lawenforcement in so-called “sanctuary” communitiesfrom cooperating with their federal counterparts.

These variations were highlighted by twoPERF members who attended the ImmigrationSummit, both from suburban Washington, D.C.area jurisdictions. Chief Charlie T. Deane of thePrince William County, Virginia, Police Depart-ment noted that elected officials in his community

State and Local ActionOn a National Issue

4. M. Hoefer, N. Rytina, and C. Campbell (August 2006). “Estimates of the Unauthorized ImmigrantPopulation Residing in the United States: January 2005.” Population Estimates. U.S. Department ofHomeland Security, Office of Immigration Statistics, Policy Directorate. 5. Ibid.6. Ibid.7. Immigrant Policy Project (August 6, 2007). 2007 Enacted State Legislation Related to Immigrants andImmigration. National Conference of State Legislatures.

Prince William County, Va. Chief Charlie T. Deane,Sacramento, Calif. Chief Albert Najera, and CollierCounty, Fla. Sheriff Don Hunter

made national headlines last summer when theyproposed legislation that would require county po-lice officers to check the citizenship status of every-one they detain or arrest for a violation of a statelaw or municipal ordinance, even traffic violations.

The Board of County Supervisors scaled backthe legislation significantly, adding a requirementthat officers have probable cause to believe a personis in the country illegally in order to conduct a sta-tus check, after Chief Deane made a stronglyworded statement to the board, warning of unin-tended consequences of the Board’s initial pro-posal. “Community policing efforts will end,” hesaid in written testimony.“This method of policing,which our county has embraced with impressiveresults, is based on the trust between the public andthe police. Approximately 18 percent of our popu-lation is Hispanic, and that population will notrespond to the current proposed legislation in apositive manner, but rather in a hostile and dis-trustful one.”

Furthermore, Chief Deane warned the legisla-tors, “Perceptions of racism will increase. PrinceWilliam County, which over the past few decadeshas had an outstanding reputation of inclusion,could be painted by the nation as a racist commu-nity intent on driving out a single population.”

“I know we’re all feeling the need for thecounty to do more about illegal immigration,”Chief Deane concluded. “However, I’m concernedthat if we don’t strike the right balance in our pol-icy, we will polarize the community and createmore problems than we solve.”

The elected officials heeded Deane’s warningsand adopted a more moderate proposal in July2007. Since then, the chief has been working withthe legislators to implement the policy. Mostrecently, in February 2008 the chief recommendedthat the county install video cameras in patrol cars,in order to protect officers and the departmentagainst complaints of racial profiling as they imple-ment the new requirements for immigration statuschecks.

At the other end of the spectrum is TakomaPark, Maryland, which has had a sanctuary ordi-nance since 1985. In 2007, when the ordinancecame up for renewal, Chief Ronald Ricucci askedthe city council to make one modification thatwould allow police, when encountering a personwanted on an immigration warrant in the NCIC, tocall ICE to obtain more information about the war-rant. Under Chief Ricucci’s proposal, if ICE advisedthe local police that the subject had previously beendeported for committing a violent felony, the localpolice could detain the person. But the city councilunanimously refused the make the change. Coun-cilmember Terry Seamens said that if ChiefRicucci’s amendment has been approved, “TakomaPark would no longer be a sanctuary city. It wouldhave allowed our police to treat people differentlybased on where they were born.”

Chief Ricucci said the outcome was that “we do not check anything to do with immigrantstatus. If we get an ICE hit, we can go no further.We cannot talk with ICE, we cannot cooperate with ICE.”

6 — State and Local Action on a National Issue

FAR LEFT: Takoma Park,Md. Chief RonaldRicucci andFramingham, Mass.Chief Steven Carl

LEFT: Richmond, Calif.Chief Chris Magnus

“We’re going to continue to do our job; it justhandcuffs us,” Ricucci added. He expressed concernabout the possibility of a police officer or residentof the community being hurt by an illegal immi-grant with a long criminal record because the sanc-tuary policy did not allow police to investigate asuspect’s legal status. “I told the council and mymayor that they have to realize, ‘If something goeswrong, it’s on you. It’s on you if one of my officersgets killed in the line of duty because we couldn’t gothat one step further.’”

Like Chief Ricucci, Chief Deane noted thatthe immigration issue is a divisive one. “From thebeginning we knew this would polarize the com-munity,” Chief Deane said. “On the radio the otherday I was asked how I would approach this if I weremaking all the decisions. I said I’d like to go intothis in a non-election year. Already, the community

reaction has been very dramatic. We had a 12-hourpublic hearing recently. Citizens were given threeminutes to speak, so you can imagine how manypeople spoke.”

As mentioned, even the terms used in thedebate are hotly contested. Federal immigration lawuses the term illegal “alien” to describe foreignnationals in the United States, but the term “illegalalien” is politically volatile in many communities.In Richmond, California, the limits on terminologygo farther. “I have been counseled not to use theterm ‘illegal immigrant’ by some elected officials,”said Richmond Chief Chris Magnus. “They preferto say ‘undocumented’ immigrants. We are notallowed to use in any of our materials the word ‘citizen.’ We are to refer to ‘residents,’ not ‘citizens.’When it comes to this issue, there is no question thatthere are very strong feelings about immigration.”

State and Local Action on a National Issue — 7

8 — Why Is Illegal Immigration Such a “Hot-Button” Topic?

MORE THAN HALF OF THE POLICE AND SHERIFFS’

departments that responded to PERF’s immigra-tion policy survey believed that the population ofillegal immigrants in their communities hasincreased more than 10 percent over the last fiveyears.

Four out of five respondents said that illegalimmigration issues figured “some” or “quite a bit”in local concerns.

Why is illegal immigration such a controver-sial issue across the country? Many chiefs and sher-iffs at the PERF Immigration Summit said that thepublic dialogue often fails to differentiate betweenimmigrants who entered the country illegally andothers who arrived through lawful means. At com-munity meetings, people often complain aboutproblems in their neighborhoods that may or maynot be attributable to illegal immigrants. For exam-ple, some contend that immigrants crowd too manypeople into houses, driving down property values.Or they create parking problems because there areso many adults living in the same house. Or theycongregate at the local convenience store, or drivewithout licenses and insurance, or force localschools to shift priorities toward English-as-a-second-language courses, and so on. Some com-plain that illegal immigrants work at jobs that paythem in cash, so they don’t pay taxes, yet their chil-dren attend local schools, driving up class sizes. Andothers believe that illegal immigrants commit a dis-proportionate amount of crime.

All of those types of things can add up to res-idents of a community feeling uncomfortable andthreatened, said Irving, Texas Police Chief LarryBoyd. “Immigration has created a rapid change

Why Is Illegal ImmigrationSuch a “Hot-Button” Topic?

Figure 1. Trends in Illegal ImmigrationRespondents perceived that the illegal immi-grant population in their jurisdiction over thelast 5 years has…

Increased substantially(>10%)

51%

Increased substantially(<10%)

26%

Stayedsame

21%

Decreasedsome ( <10%)

1%

n = 168

Figure 2. How prominently do illegalimmigration issues figure in localconcerns?

Quitea bit

36%

Some46%

Notmuch

16% Not at all2%

n = 166

Why Is Illegal Immigration Such a “Hot-Button” Topic? — 9

from what Irving looked like to residents who havebeen there for the last 30 years,” Chief Boyd said.“Irving looks much different today than it did 15 or20 years ago, and it’s frightening to a lot of people.”

Chief Darrel Stephens of Charlotte-Mecklen-burg agreed that concern about immigrants in gen-eral has driven the recent push to have police crackdown on illegal immigration. And he noted that thefeeling about immigrants has changed over the lastdecade: “When I first went to Charlotte [in 1999],the biggest immigration issue was not havingenough police officers who spoke Spanish,” he said.“There were newspaper articles condemning thepolice and other agencies for not having enoughpeople who could communicate in the same lan-guages as our immigrants. We were busy trying tohire people who were bilingual, trying to fill the gap to stem the criticism. And up until about twoyears ago, most people in the community said‘That’s really great; you guys are responsive, andyou’re trying to deal with the problem [of not hav-ing enough bilingual officers] the best you can.’ Butabout two years ago, it hit us like a ton of bricks,people in the community were looking around andseeing signs that weren’t in English, feeling pressurein the schools, and all of a sudden, people said,‘It’s illegal; it’s a crime to be here illegally; and youguys need to do something about it.’”

Sacramento Chief Albert Najera indicatedthat in his view, the immigration issue is controver-sial because there is another controversial issue

underlying it: racism. “There’s an 800-poundgorilla sitting in the corner that we’re not talkingabout, and that’s the race issue,” he said. “There’s allthese brown people who are coming into our com-munities. We have a long history of this. The Japan-ese were interned during World War II, completelyillegally. Their property was taken from them andthey were put in prison camps. We didn’t put Ger-mans in prison camps, we didn’t put Italians inprison camps, but we did with the Japanese-Amer-icans. And their perspective is that it’s because theylook different. That is a human failure, that we tendto ostracize people who look different.”

Other participants noted that the cataclysmicimpact of the September 11, 2001 attacks hastended to make people more fearful of otherswhose appearance is not like their own.

Finally, many chiefs at the PERF Summit saidthat the immigration issue has proved too temptingfor politicians looking for a “wedge” issue. “Politi-cians have been using this issue to frighten peoplefor political gain,” one chief said. Another chiefsaid: “I can tell you that where I come from, peopleare getting elected on this issue alone. We had acouncil member come up for reelection, a youngLatino council member, and somehow he gotlabeled as pro-immigration. Well, that’s a deathknell. This particular councilor was voted out andanother councilor was voted in, just for being ‘anti-immigrant,’ whatever that means.” Another chiefsaid his jurisdiction has been conducting citizen

Irving, Texas ChiefLarry Boyd

Sacramento, Calif. ChiefAlbert Najera

Montgomery County, Md. Chief Thomas Manger

10 — Why Is Illegal Immigration Such a “Hot-Button” Topic?

surveys about police services for years, and untilrecently, immigration was not even mentioned asan issue. But suddenly immigration became the topissue in his jurisdiction. Asked why he believed thathappened, the chief responded: “Why now? Localelections, that’s why now.”

Providence, Rhode Island Chief Dean Esser-man predicted that the immigration issue will notvanish as quickly as it arrived, because it is part ofa global “megatrend” toward urbanization: “I thinkwhat we’re facing is part of a much bigger mega-trend,” he said. “And the trend is we are becoming

more urban. This is the year that the planetbecomes majority urban. It’s a huge trend takingplace on the planet. The United States is alreadypredominantly an urban nation; the majority ofall of us live in cities, and it’s been that way for some time. There’s a new migration inflow, peoplemoving out of the countryside toward cities, acrossthe globe. This conversation about immigration is going on with the same passion right now in London, Paris, Rome, Dublin…. Immigration willbecome an even more passionate issue in the yearsahead.”

Most State and Local Jurisdictions Lack Written Policies on Immigration — 11

DESPITE THE INTENSITY OF EMOTION IN THE DEBATE

over illegal immigration, fewer than one-third ofthe jurisdictions represented in the PERF surveyhad enacted any policy, law or mandate concerninglocal enforcement of immigration laws.

Among those jurisdictions where a relevantpolicy, law or mandate exists, 11 departments areprohibited from checking the immigration status ofdetainees, 13 “may” check immigration status, andonly 4 departments “should” check the status of alldetainees.

Most State and Local Jurisdictions Lack Written Policies

on Immigration

Figure 3. Has your city, county or state government enacted any policy,law or mandate concerning the enforcement of immigration laws bylocal law enforcement?

Yes28%

No71%

Don’t know1%

n = 163

Of the departments that answered “yes”:

• 9 departments are prohibited from checking status ofdetainees

• 12 departments may ask/check status of detainees if illegal immigration is suspected

• 4 departments should check status of all detainees

12 — What Are the Relationships Between Illegal Immigrants and Crime?

AMONG THE CONCERNS EXPRESSED IN THE PUBLIC

debate is a perception by some that illegal immi-grants contribute to increased crime. Some chiefs atthe Summit expressed a strong belief that illegalimmigrants are a significant factor in their localcrime problems. Others said they believe that illegalimmigrants are less likely to commit crime becausemost are here to work, and they try to avoid beingnoticed by the police for any reason.

Of course, it is possible that both perceptionsreflect reality, because there may be wide variationsin the extent to which illegal immigrants commitcrimes in different communities. And even if illegalimmigrants commit crimes at the same rate as legalresidents and citizens of the United States, that canbe a significant crime problem in jurisdictions withlarge numbers of illegal immigrants. Some chiefsbelieve they have a responsibility to do all they canto remove from their jurisdictions criminals whoshould not have been in the United States in thefirst place.

There has been surprisinglylittle research into the question of whether illegal immigrants in-crease crime levels in the commu-nity, and many of the existingstudies have methodologicalproblems, a recent report by theRAND Corporation noted.8 Butparticipants at the ImmigrationSummit expressed strong viewsabout whether illegal immigrants

are contributing to crime in their jurisdictions.Chief George Gascón of Mesa, Arizona, took

issue with those who contend that illegal immi-grants are responsible for a large proportion ofcrime.“I often hear talk about the scourge of crimesby immigrants who are here illegally,” Chief Gascónwrote in a recent op-ed article.9 “In fact, I haveheard how unauthorized immigrants are responsi-ble for as much as 90 percent of the serious crime inMesa. The problem with this assertion is that it isnot supported by the facts.” Specifically, Gascónwrote, Hispanics—whether legally in this countryor not—accounted for 31.6 percent of all arrests inMesa, and accounted for approximately 30 percentof the city’s population. Incarceration figures alsoled to the conclusion that “the criminality rateamong Hispanics, whether they are here legally ornot, is proportionate to their representation.”

From Chief Gascón’s perspective, local lawenforcement officials “have a moral obligation to be

honest with ourselves and withthe people that we serve and totry to stop the spreading of mis-information. You see reports that‘9,000 Americans are killed by il-legal aliens every year.’ Even con-servative think tanks havedebunked that as mathematicallyimpossible.”

Larry Mulvey, police com-missioner in Nassau County, N.Y.,also indicated that he does not

What Are the RelationshipsBetween Illegal Immigrants

And Crime?

8. Hickman, Laura J. “Are Deportable Aliens a Unique Threat to Public Safety?” Seehttp://rand.org/news/press/2008/02/22/index1.html.9. George Gascón, “Crime and Immigration,” The Arizona Republic, Oct. 15, 2007, accessed at www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/viewpoints/articles/1015gascon1014.html.

Mesa, Ariz. Chief George Gascón

What Are the Relationships Between Illegal Immigrants and Crime? — 13

believe immigrants commit a disproportionateamount of crime in his jurisdiction. “Hispanics ac-count for about 15 percent of our population andabout 19 percent of our reported crime,” he said.“The gap is not huge.” And considering that demo-graphic studies show that Hispanic males are morelikely to be in the crime-prone years of the lateteens and early 20s, he concluded that “Latino in-volvement in crime is no different.”

Conversely, Sheriff Don Hunter of CollierCounty, Florida, said that statistics justify a concernabout illegal immigrants’ involvement in crime in hisjurisdiction. “To get at the actual specifics of our localcrime pattern regarding illegal immigration, we lookedat our local jail population. We simply asked the peo-ple in jail, at five ‘snapshots’ in time, and we discoveredthat on average 24 percent of our jail population waswilling to report that they were illegally present foreignnationals. I think I can translate the percentage ofpeople in our jail to street crime. [Considering that 24percent of the jail inmates admit being illegal immi-grants,] I suspect that 24 to 30 percent of our crimeproblem would likely be associated with the presenceof illegally present foreign nationals.”

Sheriff Hunter added: “We also looked at ourfelony warrants, and of all the warrants outstandingin our jurisdiction, 40 percent are for illegal aliens.We looked at our homicide warrants and verified that60 percent are for illegal aliens. I may be cast as azealot on this, but I think that represents a pretty sig-nificant public safety issue. For us not to be involvedin enforcing immigration laws would constitute anunnecessary public safety and officer safety risk.”

Sheriff Hunter also noted that “mere presence

is not the only violation. Other violations of lawmust be committed simply to remain here. For in-stance the undocumented person must acquiresome form of identification and authorization inorder to get employment, and you have to have anemployer who’s willing to look the other way—alsoa violation of law.” Illegal identification credentialsoften are manufactured by organized criminalgroups, he added.

“My position has been that we should notequivocate in our law enforcement duties by apply-ing wholesale discretion on the application of law,”Hunter concluded. “I think we should enforce theimmigration law.” At the same time, he added, policeexercise situational discretion in many areas. “If Istop a mom for a speeding violation and find thatshe’s on the way to the ER with a sick child, I’d prob-ably escort her there. I certainly won’t issue a trafficcitation to her. I think the same situational discretioncan be applied in the immigration realm.”

Some chiefs noted that one type of crime at-tracts their attention more than any other.“Several months ago one of my officers was killedby an illegal immigrant,” said Phoenix Chief JackHarris. The chief was referring to Officer Nick Erfle,who was shot to death as he tried to arrest ErikMartinez, a Mexican national with warrants for ag-gravated assault and other crimes. After shootingOfficer Erfle, Martinez escaped by committing acarjacking and taking the driver hostage. A shorttime later, a Phoenix police tactical squad spottedthe car and shot Martinez to death when he raisedhis gun to the hostage. Officer Erfle, who was 33,left a wife and two sons under the age of five.

Collier County, Fla. ChiefDonald Hunter

San Diego Assistant ChiefWilliam Maheu

U.S. Justice Dept. CivilRights Division Deputy ChiefDan Weiss

14 — Illegal Immigrants as Victims of, and Witnesses to, Crime

SEVERAL SUMMIT PARTICIPANTS EXPRESSED CON-

cern over the victimization of illegal immigrants.“Not only do we have heavy involvement in termsof illegal immigrants involved in crimes, in partic-ular gang-related crimes, but we found on the otherside we also have disproportionate involvement asvictims of crimes,” said Chief Chris Magnus ofRichmond, Calif. “A lot of our crime involves indi-viduals who are here illegally who are victims orwitnesses to it, and getting them to report that isvery difficult.”

Chief Charlie Deane of Prince WilliamCounty, Va. agreed.“I think that we would concludethat illegal immigrants are victimized more often,in a very specific way,” he said. “They’ve been a sig-nificant part of our increase in robberies.” Becauseillegal immigrants often lack identification papers,they may have trouble opening bank accounts, andeven if they can open an account, many are reluc-tant to do so because they don’t know whether thebank might report them to the authorities. “Illegalimmigrants are being robbed because they areknown to carry cash,” Chief Deane said.

Sheriff Don Hunter of Collier County, Fla.agreed that illegal immigrants may well not contactthe police when they are victims of crime, especiallythose illegally present victims from Central andSouth American countries where there is significantcorruption in police forces. “If as a result of culturaldisposition they don’t trust us, they don’t come for-ward to report, as best as we can determine,” hesaid. “Law enforcement agencies across this nation

discover crimes that haven’t been reported, so Iknow that some of that is happening. The NationalInstitute of Justice reports that only 42 percent ofthe victimization in the U.S. is currently reported tolaw enforcement even now, while sanctuary citiesflourish in some of our largest jurisdictions.”

Chief Darrel Stephens of Charlotte-Mecklen-burg, N.C. agreed. “Latinos in Charlotte are victim-ized much more than the rest of the population,”he said. “They’re considered an easy ‘hit.’ They’vegot cash on them. A lot don’t report being victim-ized. In fact, a few years ago our robbery rateincreased significantly after we established ourInternational Relations Unit. In the past couple of years, however, we have seen indications thatcrime reporting has declined. That is a huge con-cern to me.”

Illegal Immigrants as Victims of,And Witnesses to, Crime

Washington, D.C. Assistant ChiefJoshua Ederheimer

If Local Police Enforce Immigration Laws, Will Illegal Immigrants Be Even Less Likely To Report Being a Victim of Crime? — 15

MANY PARTICIPANTS PREDICTED THAT INCREASED

enforcement of immigration law will have a signif-icant chilling effect on crime reporting in immi-grant communities. Fear of arrest and deportationwill give illegal immigrants an even greater incen-tive to stay “under the radar” and avoid drawingattention to themselves. If crimes are being com-mitted that are not reported, it can undercut apolice department’s overall crime-fighting efforts,many chiefs noted. “If you’re a victim, we need toknow, regardless of your resident status,” saidMiami Chief John Timoney.

As shown in Figure 4, a majority of surveyrespondents believed that greater immigrationenforcement at the local level would cause reportedcrime to decrease.

Many chiefs also expressed concern that therecent focus on immigration is jeopardizing thevalue of years of work they have done attending totheir relationships with their local community.

“This definitely has the potential to impactunreported crime,” said Irving, Texas Police ChiefLarry Boyd. “It will definitely impact our ability tointeract with the Latino community in Irving.”

Chief Steven Carl of Framingham, Massachu-setts, described three homicides in a 12-monthperiod among the undocumented Brazilian com-munity in his jurisdiction, all of which could havebeen prevented, in his view, if the illegal immi-grants had not feared calling the police. In one case,for example, a woman and her 11-year-old son werebeaten to death after a long history of domestic vio-lence that had not been reported. Framingham is aBoston suburb of approximately 65,000 people, notincluding a Brazilian immigrant community esti-mated as high as 25,000. As Chief Carl explained,the homicides prompted his department to exam-ine its effectiveness with the Brazilian community:

“We started looking at this problem ofunderreporting. We all feel good when the

If Local Police EnforceImmigration Laws, Will Illegal

Immigrants Be Even Less Likely toReport Being a Victim of Crime?

Increase10%

Decrease57%

Nochange

33%

n = 159

Figure 4. Perceived Impact of EnhancedLocal Enforcement on Reported CrimeWhat impact doyou estimateenhanced immi-gration enforce-ment at the locallevel would haveon the overallcrime reported inyour jurisdiction?

Miami Chief and PERF President John Timoney

16 — If Local Police Enforce Immigration Laws, Will Illegal Immigrants Be Even Less Likely To Report Being a Victim of Crime?

crime statistics are driving down. But afterthese incidents we started wondering, if 25percent of the population is not reportingcrime, are we really driving the crimestatistics down, or are we fooling ourselves?As we started getting more involved with thecommunity and getting intelligence from some of the Brazilian community who werecourageous enough to talk to us off therecord, we realized that there’s a lot of crime,a lot of victimization going on in thecommunity. We learned there are Braziliangangs with connections to Brazil, creatingfear and intimidation problems. Their onlytargets are illegal immigrants.”

David Alejandro of the ICE Office of Deten-tion and Removal reminded Summit participantsthat some immigrants fear police for another rea-son. “There are a lot of cultural differences that wemisinterpret,” Mr. Alejandro said. “A lot of the for-eign-born population are not really afraid of beingdeported, but in their culture, law enforcement offi-cers are corrupt. We have to learn more about thesecultures before we deal with them.”

Illegal immigrants also are often witnesses tocrime. Austin Chief Art Acevedo emphasized how

damaging it can be to the law enforcement missionif substantial numbers of residents are afraid tohave any contact with police:

“As I talk to folks, I try to talk about it strictlyfrom a public safety perspective, and I talkabout the unintended consequences. And so I ask them, ‘If your child was kidnapped by a person at the bus stop, and the only witnessis the little old lady or the man on the cornerwho is an illegal immigrant, and they’reafraid to come forward, do you want to createthat environment where your child is not res-cued by law enforcement because we’re notgetting full cooperation from the commu-nity?’ Some of those same people who wantus to be involved at the ground level will lookat you and say, ‘Well, when you put it thatway, maybe it’s not such a good idea.’”

In fact, as shown on Table 1, the potential erosion of trust between the police department and the immigrant community is second only toinsufficient personnel on the list of concerns thatpolice officials have about increasing their role inimmigration enforcement, according to PERF’ssurvey.

Insufficient personnel 65%

Undermines trust between department and immigrant community

61%

Insufficient $$$ resources 60%

Insufficient jail space 51%

Distract from dept core mission 49%

Inability of ICE to assist 38%

Civil liability issues 29%

Law is too complex 27%

No concerns 9%

n = 168

Table 1. Top Concerns AboutEnhanced Local Enforcement

Austin, Tex. Chief Art Acevedo

What Are the Current Policies and Practices of Local Law Enforcement Agencies? — 17

ONLY 35 PERCENT OF THE POLICE AGENCIES RE-

sponding to PERF’s Immigration survey said theirdepartments have a written policy relating tochecking immigration status.

Overall, 60 percent of all responding depart-ments conduct checks on the immigration status ofpersons who are stopped, arrested and/or detainedfor cause. Even among departments that lack writ-ten policies, 56 percent conduct status checks.Among those departments that conduct immigra-tion status checks, the most frequent circumstancesleading to a status check are arrest (57%), booking(36%),* and when there is probable cause to believethe person is an illegal immigrant (33%). Smallernumbers of departments check immigration statusduring an investigative detention (18%) or a trafficstop (7%).

As Sheriff Jim Pendergraph of Mecklenburg

County, North Carolina, observed, “the way toavoid the system [of immigration status checks] isthree simple words: Don’t get arrested. If you don’tget arrested, you will never be fingerprinted andchecked. But if you do get arrested, you can restassured that you’re going to be checked.” (Pender-graph recently resigned as sheriff in order to take anew job as ICE’s first Executive Director for Stateand Local Coordination.)

Even departments in some sanctuary citiescheck immigration status after an arrest and notifyICE if the suspect is found to be in the country ille-gally. “We are a sanctuary city,” said Assistant ChiefHoward Jordan of Oakland, California. “But we doallow our officers to investigate the status of illegalimmigrants if they’re arrested or stopped for some-thing other than their status—a high misdemeanor,a felony, or drug-related charge. When they fill out

What Are the Current PoliciesAnd Practices of Local

Law Enforcement Agencies?

Figure 5. Does your departmenthave a written policy relating tochecking immigration status?

Yes35%

No65%

n = 167

Immigration Status ChecksOut of 163 departments, 60% of departments check status of persons who are stopped, arrested or detained for cause.

Of the departments that check persons’ immigrationstatus, they do so:

57% Upon arresting a suspect

36% When booking a suspect into a holding facility following arrest*

33% At any time when they have probable cause to believe a person is in the country illegally

18% During an investigative detention

7% During a traffic stop

n = 97* Arrest and booking are listed separately because some agencies“arrest and release” without booking.

18 — What Are the Current Policies and Practices of Local Law Enforcement Agencies?

an arrest report, they’re questioned and we’reallowed to ask regarding their immigration status.But we don’t allow our officers to stop or detainsomeone solely to investigate their status in theUnited States.”

Most chiefs agreed that status checks areappropriate in the case of serious crimes. SeattleDeputy Chief John Diaz said that even though Seat-tle has a reputation as a very “liberal” city, “Wearen’t going to ask them about immigration sta-tus—unless they’re involved in a serious crime.”

Tulsa, Okla. Chief Ron Palmer

Should Immigration Status Be Checked for Minor Offenders? — 19

A CASE CAN ALSO BE MADE FOR CHECKING THE

immigration status of less serious offenders. Someparticipants at the Immigration Summit observedthat checking immigration status in misdemeanorcases often results in finding that the suspect has a more serious criminal record. “We’re finding multiple [removable persons] on misdemeanortraffic violations with no driver’s license,” said Sheriff Jim Pendergraph. “Felony convictions fromother states, people who should have been deporteda long time ago. These are time bombs ready toexplode somewhere.”

But Chief Larry Boyd of Irving, Texas, saidsome in his community would object if misde-meanor arrestees were subject to status checks. “Inmy community there’s no consensus about identi-fying people after arrest,” he said. “Regardless ofwhich side you are on, very few people have troublewith felonies or DWI, turning them over to ICE.But the debate starts when it comes to lower-levelmisdemeanors, especially traffic violations. Thenumber one reason for someone coming into ourjail and getting identified is traffic warrants. Theyget stopped for a speeding ticket and there’s a war-rant out for their arrest. I know there’s not a con-sensus in my community that that’s whereimmigration status checks need to start.”

Many chiefs also noted that ICE does not haveanything close to the number of detention beds or

other resources to house all of the illegal immi-grants that local police could identify. According toICE’s latest report, ICE houses an average of29,786 illegal aliens in detention facilities on anygiven day—a small fraction of the estimated 11 mil-lion illegal aliens in the United States. Many chiefstold stories of calling ICE to report having an illegalimmigrant in custody on a relatively minor charge,only to be told to call back when they had moreserious offenders to report. “If every departmentreports everyone who’s here illegally, but ICE can’tdeport them, what are we doing it for?” said Freder-ick, Md. Chief Kim Dine.

Should Immigration StatusBe Checked

For Minor Offenders?

Lawrence, Mass. Mayor Michael Sullivan andSan Antonio Deputy Chief David Head

20 — “Probable Cause” and a Cloudy Legal Picture

AS NOTED IN FIGURE 5 (P. 17), 60 PERCENT OF DE-

partments surveyed by PERF check the immigra-tion status of persons they stop, arrest, or detainunder various circumstances. Of those depart-ments, 33 percent check when they have probablecause to believe the person is in the United Statesillegally. Thus, approximately 20 percent of all thedepartments check immigration status for probablecause.

“Probable cause” is a higher standard of evi-dence than “reasonable suspicion,” but lower thanthe “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard requiredto secure a criminal conviction. And an officer mayuse any trustworthy information to establish prob-able cause, even if rules of evidence would bar theinformation from being admitted at trial—such ashearsay information or a person’s prior criminalrecord. But it is important that police officers thor-oughly document all of the factors that entered intotheir belief that probable cause existed.

While there is a large body of case law regard-ing what constitutes probable cause in the areas ofarrests and searches and seizures, chiefs and sheriffsnoted that it is less clear how to translate “probablecause” into day-to-day practice in the context ofimmigration enforcement.

Some police leaders are trying to formulatereal-world guidelines on how to proceed. For exam-ple, Commissioner Larry Mulvey of NassauCounty, New York said that in his view, “Merelybeing at a labor site looking for work is not reason-able suspicion to inquire about status.”

Chief Deane of Prince William County, Vir-ginia, whose department has been directed byelected officials to inquire about immigration sta-tus when there is probable cause to believe an indi-vidual is in this country illegally, offered someguidance: Probable cause means “factors that wouldlead a reasonable and experienced police officer tobelieve that this person is probably guilty of thisviolation, in this case, that they’re here unlawfully.”As an example, Deane said probable cause “couldpossibly come in the form of a person presenting a foreign driver’s license, not being able to speakEnglish, and giving two or three names.”

And in the experience of Chief Deane andothers at the PERF Summit, some detainees volun-teer that they’re here illegally.

“I think the key to making this new policylawful is that we’re going to train our officers tomake sure that the first step is a lawful, routinestop,” Deane said. “And they don’t go any furtherthan that unless there is clear evidence, probablecause, without any aspect of racial profiling.” Deaneemphasized the importance of careful training ofofficers. “We’re going to train each officer in the

“Probable Cause” and A Cloudy Legal Picture

Figure 6. About half of departments offer or facilitate training to officers on policy/procedure for handling immigration issues

Offertraining

51.5%Don’toffertraining

48.5%

n = 165

“Probable Cause” and a Cloudy Legal Picture — 21

spirit of our policy, which is, we want to deal withthe serious criminal offenders in our communitywho are threats. We want to first prosecute them,have them serve their sentence, and then deportthem.”

(Figure 6 shows that slightly more than halfthe departments responding to the PERF surveyoffer or facilitate training for their officers on policyand procedure for handling immigration issues.)

As police try to define what constitutes prob-able cause to believe a person is an illegal immi-grant, the potential for charges of racial profilingloomed large for some Summit participants. ChiefRick Myers of Colorado Springs observed that,“prior to 9/11, racial profiling was a huge issue inthe United States, but today these concerns seem to carry less weight.” He worried that “even withtremendous training, there are some officers whoare going to base probable cause on appearance.”

Chief Albert Najera of Sacramento raised anadditional concern about the legalities of heightenedenforcement of immigration laws: how Mirandawarnings fit into the picture.“Did we forget Miranda

along the way here someplace?” he asked. “Espe-cially if they’re in custody? Did we forget theirrights to representation before that? Remember,they’re supposed to understand Miranda, andthey’re supposed to knowingly waive Miranda.Once we start down that slippery slope of forgettingConstitutional issues, it gets dangerous, it trulydoes.”

White Plains, New York, Police CommissionerFrank Straub echoed these concerns, emphasizingthe value of maintaining the principles of commu-nity policing despite the increased emphasis onimmigration enforcement. “We have an obligationto protect all people, legal or illegal, and to do itwithin the framework of the Constitution, and wehave to be very careful with that,” he said. “We inpolicing have taken a very strong, positive approachto helping people integrate into our community.Our obligation under community policing is tomake sure people’s rights are protected, that they’renot victimized by crime, and that they becomeviable members of our communities. That’s theessence of community policing.”

Colorado Springs ChiefRick Myers

White Plains, N.Y. CommissionerFrank Straub

Gaithersburg, Md.Chief John King

22 — Working with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)

ACCORDING TO THE PERF SURVEY (SEE TABLE 2), A

large majority of departments contact ICE whenthere is an NCIC warrant (76 percent) or when asuspect has been determined to be in the UnitedStates illegally (64 percent).

Many Summit participants draw the line atenforcing civil, administrative warrants for abscon-ders that they find in the NCIC during their routinepolice activities. “We draw a bright red line. Wedon’t get involved on civil; we do get involved oncriminal. Our job is to enforce criminal laws, notcivil,” said Craig Ferrell, deputy director and generalcounsel to the Houston Police Department.

Chiefs reported varying experiences withICE. On the positive side, for example, the PhoenixPolice Department has homicide detectives work-ing side by side with 10 ICE agents to target violentcriminals who are illegal immigrants. “We have areally good relationship with ICE,” Chief Jack Har-ris said. “We go after violent criminals who are ille-gal immigrants. Basically, if you’re a landscapergoing to work every day, we don’t arrest you andturn you over to ICE, even with a traffic stop. But ifyou’re a criminal, you’re going to jail. And if you

happen to be illegal, you’ll be turned over to ICEand deported.”

But involvement with ICE can be a very divi-sive issue for police in some communities. “Weprobably have more organized protests related toICE coming into our community and makingarrests than probably any other issue, even thoughwe have many other issues,” said Chief Chris Mag-nus of Richmond, Calif. “We have as many as 500 or600 people show up to council meetings to protestand make clear they don’t want local law enforce-ment involved in any way, shape or form workingwith ICE or making arrests that have to do withimmigration status. That’s been tough, because wehave done some good work with ICE around MS-13 [the violent Latin American gangs known asMara Salvatrucha]. We have a very active MS-13presence in Richmond and ICE has been very help-ful with that. It’s really frustrating when people arealmost willing to tolerate illegal gang activity likeMS-13 rather than have any cooperative relation-ship with immigration authorities.”

On the negative side, Commissioner LarryMulvey of Nassau County, N. Y., described a raid in

Working with Immigration andCustoms Enforcement (ICE)

When there is an NCIC warrant for a suspect 76%

When a suspect or offender has been determined to be in U.S. illegally

64%

To verify the immigration status of a person 36%

To report a crime victim who is in the U.S. illegally 10%

To report a crime witness who is in the U.S. illegally 8%

n = 168

Table 2. When do departments contact ICE?

Phoenix Chief Jack Harris

Working with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) — 23

which his officers cooperated with ICE agents toremove 131 identified gang members who weredeportable because they had been arrested in thepast. “They asked for assistance from my depart-ment in terms of a bus to transport subjects toManhattan and to have uniformed officers present,so when they did consensual knocks on doors, peo-ple would look out and see our department, whichthey recognize and trust and they’d answer thedoor,” he said.

The raid did not go well, he indicated. “Weentered 131 homes at 4:30 in the morning,” he said.“We woke up citizens, legal residents, and undocu-mented immigrants who were not the focus of theoperation. It caused tremendous turmoil in mycommunity.” All but six out of 96 administrativewarrants issued in this search for gang membershad wrong or outdated addresses, and only three ofthe 40 individuals arrested on the first night of theoperation were gang members.10 From Commis-sioner Mulvey’s perspective, this experience wasantithetical to his department’s philosophy andpotentially damaging to its relationship with thecommunity. Mulvey withdrew his department’ssupport before the third night of the operation.

“I will not support it until we iron out theseissues,” Mulvey added. “But I believe in the intent ofthe operation. If there are gang members in thecounty who have been involved in criminality, ifthey’re undocumented I would like to get them outof our county.”

There was agreement that ICE is unable torespond to every call from local law enforcement.“There are about 12 million illegal immigrants inthe Unites States,” said David Alejandro of the ICEDetection and Removal Office. “ICE has about10,000 officers and 30,000 beds. All of those bedsare occupied today. Depending on where they’recoming from, the type of violation, and the proce-dure they must go through, some of these individ-uals can occupy these beds for anywhere from amonth to a couple years. These beds are continu-ously being filled by individuals who are beingapprehended.”

“If every police agency in America went outand said, ‘I’m going to find one, two, three of thoseabsconders today,’ ICE would not have the capacityto deal with it,” Chief Darrel Stephens said. “It’s notpractical. And if it’s not practical, then we’d betterthink of other ways to deal with it.”

10. Nina Bernstein, “Raids Were a Shambles, Nassau Complains to U.S.” The New York Times, October 3, 2007.

Herndon, Va. Chief Toussaint Summer, CommissionerLarry Mulvey of Nassau County, N.Y., and Danbury,Conn. Chief Al Baker

Houston Deputy Chief Craig Ferrell, Jr., Bureau of Justice Assistance Deputy Director Jim Burch,National Institute of Justice Deputy Director ThomasFeucht, and NIJ Acting Principal Deputy DirectorDavid Hagy

As Sheriff Jim Pendergraph of MecklenburgCounty, North Carolina, observed, “It all boilsdown to resources. The level of detainment is suchthat you have to have committed an aggravatedfelony to be detained for removal, or they are rightback in the community.”

The situation is similar in police agencies andtheir own local criminal justice systems, Pender-graph noted. “I have 3,000 beds in my jail and44,000 outstanding arrest warrants on file. If every-one got arrested the same day, we’d be in a heck ofa mess,” he said.

24 — Working with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)

Participation in the 287(g) Program Is Small, But Growing — 25

ONLY A SMALL FRACTION (4 PERCENT) OF PERF’S

survey respondents participate in the Section287(g) program, which establishes a memorandumof agreement between local law enforcement agen-cies and ICE, under which local departments canperform immigration enforcement functions afterparticipating in ICE-sponsored training. Another 6percent have applied to participate in the program,and 29 percent are considering participation (seeTable 3).

Nationwide, 34 state and local law enforce-ment agencies in 15 states participate in 287(g),another 77 have applied,11 and more than 400 localand state officers have been trained.12

Summit participants who have joined the287(g) program said they have found it to be useful.“Members of our gang task force, as well as depart-ment officers, are trained in 287(g),” said ChiefToussaint Summers of Herndon, Va. “We referto it as just another tool in the tool box avail-able to us to ensure the safety of our commu-nity. When ICE officers are not available, wenow have officers who are authorized to step inand take over those functions and completewhatever task needs to be done. It has been asuccess from the standpoint that it makes usmore efficient, and it allows us access to a data-base that we wouldn’t have normally.”

Chief Summers was referring to a data-base maintained by the Law Enforcement Sup-port Center (LESC), which gathers informationon immigration status and identity from eight

Department of Homeland Security databases,NCIC, the Interstate Identification Index, and otherstate criminal history indices. Available to law en-forcement agencies around the clock, LESC runsdata on criminal suspects to determine whetherthey are subject to ICE intervention.13

In Collier County, Florida, 27 members ofthe Sheriff ’s Office have 287(g) authority to identifythe immigration status of all persons arrested andto work on gangs, fugitive warrants, and organizedcrime. Sheriff Don Hunter reported that this effortappears to have effectively defused the primarygangs in his county by reporting their leaders toICE.

Chief Jack Harris of Phoenix noted that theMaricopa County Sheriff participates in 287(g) andchecks the status of everyone who is booked into

Participation in the287(g) Program Is Small,

But Growing

11. Daniel C. Vock, “Police join feds to tackle immigration,” www.stateline.org, November 27, 2007.12. http://www.ice.gov/partners/dro/iceaccess.htm.13. http://www.ice.gov/partners/dro/iceaccess.htm.

Table 3. Participation in 287(g) 287(g) establishes a Memorandum of Agreementbetween departments and ICE allowing departmentsto perform immigration enforcement functions afterparticipating in an ICE training program.

Of departments responding to survey:

4% Currently participate in 287(g)

96% Do not participate in 287(g)

6% Have applied to participate in 287(g)

29% Are considering participating in 287(g)

n = 165

26 — Participation in the 287(g) Program Is Small, But Growing

the jail. Last year, of 45,000 individuals bookedfrom Phoenix alone, 6,000 were held for immigra-tion authorities.

Several chiefs reported strong support fromtheir communities for their participation in the287(g) program—even among the immigrant pop-ulation. Communication with community groupsis the key, they indicated. “I am pursuing the 287(g)program for inside the jail facility, for the criminalelement,” said Sheriff Douglas Gillespie of LasVegas. “I have reached out to the Hispanic commu-nity, bringing together roughly 50 people, includingpolitical activists in the community, and they are insupport of us going after the criminal element. AndI think from a local law enforcement standpoint,from my perspective, that’s where we need to keepour focus.”

Chief Summers of Herndon, Va. agreed.“Before entering into the 287(g) program, we metwith residents, including immigrant groups, andexplained the program. We assured these groupsthat our actions under 287(g) were defined clearlyin the Memorandum of Agreement we have withICE, and that any officers who act outside theparameters defined in the MOA will be heldaccountable.”

Sheriff Jim Pendergraph of MecklenburgCounty, N.C said the 287 (g) program has helpedMecklenburg County rid itself of many criminaloffenders. “We were seeing people we knew had to be illegal aliens, getting arrested on every chargein the book, making bond and walking out thefront door—and we really didn’t know who theywere; there was no good way to identify who theywere.” The 287 (g) program has helped the Sheriff ’sOffice work with ICE on identifying those offend-ers and removing them, he said. “In the last 18months we have identified 3,200 people in Meck-lenburg County who have committed a crime andwhom we have identified as illegal aliens, and who are in the removal process or have been removed,”he said.

Pendergraph added that immigrants from 58different countries have been arrested in Mecklen-burg County. “We’re finding people from countriesof interest, countries that have made it know thatthey’re involved in terrorism,” he said. “And it is anational security issue that you know who is in the community.” However, Sheriff Pendergraphadded that “the people who are here to hurt us[with terrorism] aren’t going to get arrested fordrunk driving.”

Mecklenburg County, N.C.Sheriff Jim Pendergraph

Herndon, Va. ChiefToussaint Summers

Las Vegas SheriffDouglas Gillespie

Should Illegal Immigrants Be Allowed to Obtain Official Driver’s Licenses or Other Identification Credentials? — 27

DISCUSSION ABOUT THE NEED FOR PROPER IDENTIFI-

cation of illegal immigrants arose in the context oftraffic incidents coming to the attention of local lawenforcement. As with other immigration issues,the police executives were not of like mind on thequestion of identification cards. A number of chiefsnoted that because illegal immigrants are notallowed to obtain driver’s licenses, they often fleewhen they are involved in a traffic accident.

Allowing illegal immigrants to obtain a dri-ver’s license would help alleviate this problem,some chiefs believed. Issuing driver’s licenses to ille-gal immigrants would also enable them to openbank accounts, so they would be less likely to carrylarge sums of cash and might be targeted for streetrobberies less often.

“The vast majority of these people are notcriminal aliens; they’re economic aliens,” saidAustin, Texas Chief Art Acevedo. “They are not athreat to our public safety. Theywant a state driver’s license; theywant to get insurance. Imagine if wehad 12 million people paying insur-ance, the positive economic impactthat would have on all of us.”

“In California, the driver’slicense issue is an enormous topic,”said Sergio Diaz, deputy chief of theLos Angeles Police Department. Ashe sees it, “With this driver’s licenseissue in California, we’re isolating,alienating, forcing underground ahuge part of the population. They’re

driving of necessity, we don’t know who they are,and there are all these incentives for them to stayunderground. We’re forcing them further and fur-ther to the margins and away from where we canhave some positive effect on them. People whowould otherwise be inclined to follow the law, areobligated by our own poor public policy into beingoutlaws.”

In July 2007, the city of New Haven, Conn.began issuing resident identification cards that giveillegal immigrants access to community services.According to Chief Francisco Ortiz, “We look at thisin the police department as a human dignity issue,reaching out to folks who don’t normally reach outto the police department. It is consistent with ourcommunity policing philosophy.”

But several chiefs disputed the validity of cre-dentials that are based on an oath or affidavit, as is New Haven’s identification card. Chiefs also cast

doubt on any driver’s license orother form of identification that isbased on the “Matricula Consular,”a card issued by the Mexican gov-ernment to identify Mexican na-tionals who are living outside theircountry. According to the web siteof the Mexican consulate,14 in orderto obtain a Matricula Consular, anapplicant must appear in person,present an original birth certificate,provide an official government-issued photo I.D., and provide proofof address (utility bill, lease, etc.)

Should Illegal ImmigrantsBe Allowed to Obtain

Official Driver’s Licenses orOther Identification Credentials?

14. http://www.mexico.us/consulate.htm.

New Haven, Ct. ChiefFrancisco Ortiz

28 — Should Illegal Immigrants Be Allowed to Obtain Official Driver’s Licenses or Other Identification Credentials?

under the same name. The Matricula includes apicture, a signature, and a brief description of theindividual it identifies (name, date, place of birth,and address). Security features include lamination,a watermark and a magnetic strip. The Matricula isnormally valid for a period of five years, but it maybe issued for lesser terms as indicated by the expira-tion date.

Despite these apparent precautions, the U.S.Department of Justice and the FBI have determinedthat the Matricula Consular is not a reliable form of identification because there is no way to verifythe true identity of the card holder. As a result,the cards are vulnerable to fraud and forgery.15

Sheriff Don Hunter called the cards “an illu-sion of legitimacy,” and commented that “[just] anyform of identification is not necessarily a goodthing.” Chief Daniel O’Leary of Brookline, Mass.said, “I wasn’t satisfied with what the Mexican gov-ernment uses for backup documentation and howwe could check on it. In our roles as police officials,if we’re asked to endorse something that people aregoing to rely on, we should feel comfortable doingthat.”

Yet some chiefs observed that U.S. identifica-tion credentials are likewise subject to fraud. Chief

Albert Najera of Sacramento cited the false IDsubiquitously obtained by underage college studentsas one example. Chief John Romero of Lawrence,Massachusetts noted that when the MassachusettsRegistry of Motor Vehicles implemented a facialrecognition program as part of the screeningprocess for new driver’s license applications,16 theyfound people with three or four different driver’slicenses and state ID cards.

Chief Rick Myers of Colorado Springs said,“We aren’t any better at it in the United States. Wedon’t have a national ID. I got my Social Securitycard when I was 12 years old—and the signaturelooks like a 12-year-old’s. The card looks like itcame out of a Cracker Jack box, but it’s an officialU.S. document. Some communities don’t want tolook at the matricula cards because of the questionsabout whether they’re verifiable; other cities saythey’re better than nothing. But presumably, ifevery time I stop someone they have the same card,does it matter if their name is spelled right?”

There was general agreement that a moresecure, national ID card based on biometrics wouldbe helpful. Chief Harris of Phoenix recommendedtying the availability of this type of national ID to a“reasonable immigration and citizenship policy”

15. “Consular ID Cards in a Post-9/11 World,” Testimony of Steve McCraw, Assistant Director of the Office ofIntelligence, FBI, Before the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and Claims,June 26, 2003, accessed at http://www.fbi.gov/congress/congress03/mccraw062603.htm.16. Facial recognition capabilities employ a computer algorithm to examine an applicant's photo against allother photos of registered drivers in Massachusetts to determine whether the applicant may be attemptingto obtain a duplicate license using a false claimed identity.

FAR LEFT: Lawrence, Mass.Chief John Romero

LEFT: Brookline, Mass. Chief Daniel O'Leary

and work visa, whereby immigrants could obtainthe ID, get a driver’s license, and have the opportu-nity to become a U.S. citizen over three to five years.

On the other hand, Chief Deane of PrinceWilliam County advised caution before issuingidentification to illegal immigrants. “Once you startgiving identification credentials to people who arehere illegally, I think that opens up a lot of otherissues that have more negatives than positives,” hesaid. Lawrence, Mass. Chief John Romero added,“With a state ID card or driver’s license, you canbuild an entire identity.”

To illustrate the scope of the credentialingproblem, David Alejandro of ICE described situa-tions at the airport in San Juan, Puerto Rico,in which U.S. authorities seize packages of fraudu-lent identification documents. These packages con-tain duplicates of original birth certificates,unsigned Social Security cards, and driver’s licenseslacking photographs. If these packages make theirway into the United States, the recipients can signthe Social Security cards, affix their photos to thedrivers’ licenses, and use these documents to obtainpassports.

Should Illegal Immigrants Be Allowed to Obtain Official Driver’s Licenses or Other Identification Credentials? — 29

30 — The Need for a Federal Policy

SUMMIT PARTICIPANTS REPEATEDLY RETURNED TO A

strongly held conviction that the federal govern-ment is responsible for immigration policy:

“Congress has to pass some type of immigra-tion legislation. I think it’s a horrible mistakefor local police, in the absence of federal policy, to take on this role when we don’thave the authority and we don’t have theresources—to wrestle with issues like Charlie[Deane] has with his Board, establishing apolicy that forces them to take a very activerole in dealing with immigration issues whentheir authority still hasn’t been made clearand federal resources are not sufficient tosupport them.”— C H A R LOT T E-M E C K L E N B U RG, N.C.C H I E F DA R R E L S T E P H E N S

“Our national government has let us downbecause they haven’t addressed this issue.”— C H I E F M E LV I N H I G H,P R I N C E G E O RG E’S C O U N T Y, M D.

“This is a federal responsibility, so the federalgovernment needs to be realistic andprioritize what we should be focusing on. Ifwe’re trying to get the ‘worst of the worst’ outof the country, instead of saying we’re goingto use 287(g) and we’re going to pick upanybody who’s illegal, we really need to givelocal law enforcement some clear direction.We’re really looking for people who havecommitted serious felonies, because those are the people that we really stand the best of chance of a) keeping detained, and b) deporting, versus just picking up anyone

who is here illegally. We need clear focus,direction, and structure.”— W H I T E P L A I N S, N.Y. C O M M I S S I O N E RF R A N K S T R AU B

“If we really wanted to stop this, we wouldmake it tremendously costly to Americanbusinesses to hire illegal immigrants, but werecognize the economic impact would behorrible. As a consequence, we in policing are being forced to step into this political,economic debate that we should not beinvolved in.”— AU S T I N, T E X A S C H I E F A RT AC EV E D O

Chief Dean Esserman of Providence, R.I.expressed a different view. “My best guess is that it’sgoing to be a much more passionate issue in theyears ahead,” he said. “This isn’t going to be a bump that’s going to subside. It’s going to be anincreasingly front-burner issue. But this trend isgoing on across the globe, and I think that’s going

The Need fora Federal Policy

Charlotte-Mecklenburg, N.C. Chief Darrel Stephensand Providence, R.I. Chief Dean Esserman

The Need for a Federal Policy — 31

to transform the immigration issue from a nation-states’ issue to a very local issue, and we’re going to be more involved, and we are not going to be able to rely on our nation-states to tell us. Wewill regulate this issue. For practical reasons, we will be forced to develop our own policies and procedures.”

Regardless of whether policies will be setnationally or at the local level, some chiefs exhortedtheir colleagues to speak up and take a leadershiprole in defining the illegal immigration issues andsetting policy. “It’s time for us to step up and say,‘This really is about the right thing to do,’” saidChief Bob Champagne of Peabody, Mass.

Sheriff Douglas Gillespie of Las Vegas agreed.“We in law enforcement maybe have to becomemore involved in pushing national policy, becausewe’re being thrust into this. Without us getting ourideas and thoughts out there, I believe some policywill probably come down that a lot of us won’t likeor agree with. When this topic comes up in commu-nities that I read about or hear about, for the mostpart I don’t see elected officials other than the sher-iff defending a position, I see them taking a position.The challenge that I have as a sheriff is taking a posi-tion, and doing it in such a way that protects therights of all the people in the community.”

Commissioner Frank Straub of White Plains,N.Y. noted that a number of PERF members hadvisited the Holocaust Museum in Washington, D.C.on the day before the Immigration Summit. “Wecan’t allow American policing to become corrupted

by a political agenda,” he said. “The HolocaustMuseum stands to show how the police and themilitary were co-opted by a political agenda andturned against a whole segment of the population.We can’t become a wedge between the federal gov-ernment and the communities we serve.”

Finally, Sacramento Chief Najera offered apersonal experience that exemplified the dilemmafor local law enforcement:

“Two or three years ago, I was coming homefrom a high school event with my daughter.I pulled into line at a DUI checkpoint. Myofficers had stopped a pickup truck, a youngman, his pregnant wife and two little kids,an old pickup truck full of lawn equipment.This guy was an unlicensed driver, undoubt-edly an illegal immigrant. In California we’rerequired to tow vehicles for at least a 30-dayimpound for unlicensed drivers. But theywere also taking away the livelihood from thisguy. He’s here trying to do whatever he coulddo, and those kids were probably Americancitizens, born here. It is the law, but we weretaking the livelihood away from this guy. Howis he going to get the truck and his equip-ment back? He has to be a licensed driver, hehas to register his truck, he has to have insur-ance. We’ve put the guy in a Catch-22 situa-tion. Everything that we did was legal; the guy was here illegally. But is this what wereally want?”

FAR LEFT: Prince George'sCounty, Md. Chief MelvinHigh

LEFT: Peabody, Mass.Chief Bob Champagne

32 — There Are Some Points of General Consensus

THE DISCUSSION AT PERF’S IMMIGRATION SUMMIT

was spirited, and participants offered a wide rangeof strongly held and sometimes opposing views onmany of the thorny issues that come up in the pub-lic debate on illegal immigration.

However, the chiefs who participated inPERF’s Summit generally agreed on three points:

1. I T I S A P P R O P R I AT E T O C H E C KI M M I G R AT I O N S TAT U S AT T H ET I M E O F A R R E S T A N D B O O K I N GF O R S E R I O U S O F F E N S E S .This practice is routine in many of the communi-ties represented among Summit participants andsurvey respondents. Even many departments in so-called sanctuary cities check the immigrationstatus of suspects in serious or violent crimes.

There was some debate, however, about thevalue of checking the status of misdemeanants. Afew chiefs argued that stops for misdemeanoroffenses often reveal more serious crimes. Otherspointed to two potential drawbacks: 1) objectionsfrom their communities to a perceived heavy-handed reaction to relatively minor transgressions,and 2) the limited resources of ICE to respond tolesser offenses. Of paramount importance to manyof the chiefs was the potential damage to their rela-tionships with immigrant communities in theirjurisdictions.

2. A NAT I O NA L I D E N T I F I C AT I O NC A R D B A S E D O N B I O M E T R I CT E C H N O L O G Y WO U L D B EH E L P F U L .Despite efforts in some communities to providesome form of acceptable credentials for the illegalimmigrant population, all existing forms of identi-fication—whether U.S. driver’s licenses, MexicanMatricula Consular cards, or credentials issued bysome municipalities such as New Haven, Conn.—were found lacking because they are too easily falsi-fied. Many chiefs called for the development of anational identification card based on biometrictechnology such as fingerprints or DNA.

3. T H E U. S . C O N G R E S S N E E D S T OS E T P O L I C Y F O R T H E NAT I O N

Time and again throughout the day, Summit par-ticipants decried the lack of federal leadership.They urged their colleagues across the nation to bemore vocal on these issues, to take a stand, and touse their collective political clout to move Congressand the executive branch to provide more guidanceand resources.

There Are Some PointsOf General Consensus

Conclusion — 33

THE ROLE OF LOCAL POLICE AND SHERIFFS’ DEPART-

ments in immigration enforcement is one of themost difficult issues confronting police executives.

Our approach to many issues in policing isfairly straightforward: conduct solid research, sur-vey the field, seek out the knowledge and wisdom oflaw enforcement executives and other experts about“best practices” and other aspects of the issue, andbased on all of that, try to devise a single set of rec-ommendations that we believe all departmentswould be well-advised to consider.

On immigration enforcement, however, wehave a special problem: No one set of recommenda-tions can account for the extreme differences in thepolitical climate of various jurisdictions on theimmigration issue. A measure that seems to makeperfect sense in one city—working with ICE in a287(g) program, for example—is political anath-ema in another jurisdiction.

Compounding the problem is the fact that theimmigration issue is amazingly dynamic. Not onlyare cities and counties across the country rushing tocraft their own policies because federal lawmakersand policy-makers have been unable to set anational policy, but local jurisdictions are alsobeing affected by the policies of their neighboringstates, counties, and cities. The Houston Chroniclerecently ran a story that started with this:

Illegal immigrants are flowing into Texas across

its long borders. But they aren’t just swimming

across the Rio Grande from Mexico or making

dangerous treks through the rugged desert.

Instead, a new rush of illegal immigrants are

driving down Interstate 35 from Oklahoma, or

heading east to Texas from Arizona, to flee

tough new anti-illegal immigrant laws in those

and other states.

“They’re really tightening the screws,” said

Mario Ortiz, an undocumented Mexican

worker who came to Houston after leaving

Phoenix last year. “There have been a lot com-

ing—it could be 100 a day.”17

Similarly, stricter immigration enforcementpolicies being implemented in Prince WilliamCounty, Va. reportedly have caused illegal immi-grants there to move north to jurisdictions likeArlington, Va., which has a reputation for welcom-ing immigrants. In a story titled “ImmigrantsHaven’t Worn Out the Welcome Mat in Arlington,”a Washington Post reporter wrote:

When nearby counties began trying to drive out

illegal immigrants this summer, Arlington said

it would treat everyone with “dignity and

respect, regardless of immigration status.”

Other counties felt overwhelmed by immi-

grants, but Arlington officials said they would

happily provide them with every service

allowed by law.

“The attitude has always been: They’re here.

They’re part of the community. Let’s help them

succeed,” said Chris Zimmerman, a longtime

County Board member.18

Conclusion

By PERF Executive Director Chuck Wexler

17. See http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/5509022.html18. See http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/14/AR2007111402322.html

34 — Conclusion

So police executives not only have to workwith local lawmakers to develop immigration poli-cies that make sense for their own jurisdiction; theyneed to pay attention to what’s going on in the nextcity, the next county, and the next state, and analyzehow other jurisdictions’ policies may impact theirown situations.

Having said that, let me rush to add that thesituation is far from intractable. We still know cer-tain things.

We know that solid research can help informthe debate. For example, we need more research onissues like the extent to which official crime statis-tics may be understated because immigrants, fear-ing deportation, are afraid to report beingvictimized. In coming years, we should conductresearch on whether increasingly strict immigra-tion enforcement policies exacerbate this problem.

We also know that principles of communitypolicing are always helpful. So police chiefs andsheriffs, recognizing that immigration enforcementis an extremely polarizing issue, should strive tomaintain open lines of communication with all oftheir community groups on the immigration issue,to maintain a sense of transparency and fairness.Chiefs told us this at our Summit.

We know that the capacity of federal authori-ties to respond to local immigration enforcementefforts is sharply limited, so it makes sense to focusany immigration enforcement efforts on immigrantswho have committed serious crimes. This also helpsto guard against complaints of racial profiling. Manychiefs and sheriffs have made that point.

And we know that some departments alreadyhave been working on these issues for years, sothere is much to be gained by looking at existingpolicies and recommendations. For example, morethan a year ago the Major Cities Chiefs (MCC) issued a set of principles for Congress and the Pres-ident to keep in mind in devising federal policies on the role of local law enforcement in immigra-tion enforcement.19 (See Appendix A.) This report highlights the MCC’s concerns in several areas,

including: the risk that immigration enforcementwill undermine the trust that immigrant communi-ties have in the police; local law enforcement agen-cies’ lack of resources; the extremely complicatednature of federal immigration laws and lack oftraining of local officers in this area; and the lack oflocal authority on civil aspects of federal immigra-tion law.

On the other hand, Collier County, Fla. Sher-iff Don Hunter has produced a legal analysis thatargues against any general unwillingness to enforceimmigration laws based on a fear of losing the trustof immigrant communities. (See Appendix M.)“Unbiased, unprejudiced and influence-freeenforcement of law is a keystone principle of pro-fessional U.S. law enforcement,” Sheriff Hunterstates. “Trust is not inspired in the idea that certaincrimes will not be enforced. The reverse is true.Trust is built on a foundation of predictability; con-sistent application of law creates predictability,which inspires trust.”

Many police departments’ policies can befound in appendices to this report. Law enforce-ment executives trying to help shape the debate intheir own jurisdictions can pick and choose ele-ments from various policies that seem most com-patible with the direction they want to take.

For PERF, it appears that the immigrationissue will be a flashing light at the center of ourradar screen for years to come. We already are pur-suing new possibilities for immigration enforce-ment research and other initiatives. And of course,the immigration issue will remain a key issue inPERF’s daily contacts with its member law enforce-ment executives.

In a sense, this publication should be consid-ered an interim report, a “work in progress.” It is too soon to know the consequences, intended andunintended, of many of the immigration policiesbeing developed across the country. Law enforce-ment policies are evolving as we write this report.Prince William County, Va., for example, is doingthe nuts-and-bolts work on implementing the

19. See http://www.majorcitieschiefs.org/pdfpublic/mcc_position_statement_revised_cef.pdf

Conclusion — 35

policies that it enacted last summer; other jurisdic-tions are just starting to review their practices.There was a time when many local law enforcementagencies simply considered immigration enforce-ment a federal responsibility, but I think we can saythat that time has passed. The new paradigm seemsto be that local police and sheriffs will supplement

the federal role, to greater or lesser degrees, depend-ing on local community input. There is a lot of fear,concern, and uncertainty about the implications ofthat change.

We hope that this publication will serve as anearly-2008 status report on the immigration issueand a springboard for further analysis and discussion.

36 — About the Police Executive Research Forum

THE POLICE EXECUTIVE RESEARCH FORUM (PERF)

is a professional organization of progressive chiefexecutives of city, county and state law enforcementagencies who collectively serve more than 50 per-cent of the U.S. population. In addition, PERF hasestablished formal relationships with internationalpolice executives and law enforcement organiza-tions from around the globe. Membership includespolice chiefs, superintendents, sheriffs, state policedirectors, university police chiefs, public safetydirectors, and other law enforcement professionals.Established in 1976 as a nonprofit organization,PERF is unique in its commitment to the applica-tion of research in policing and the importance ofhigher education for police executives. Besides acommitment to police innovation and profession-alism, PERF members must hold a four-year collegedegree.

PERF continues to conduct some of the mostinnovative police and criminal justice research andprovides a wide variety of management and techni-cal assistance programs to police agencies through-out the world. PERF’s groundbreaking work oncommunity and problem-oriented policing, racialprofiling, use of force, less-lethal weapons, andcrime reduction strategies has earned it a promi-nent position in the police community. PERF con-tinues to work toward increased professionalismand excellence in the field through its publicationsand training programs. PERF sponsors and con-ducts the Senior Management Institute for Police(SMIP). This program provides comprehensiveprofessional management and executive develop-ment training to police chiefs and law enforcementexecutives. Convened annually in Boston, SMIPinstructors include professors from leading univer-sities, with the core faculty from Harvard Univer-sity’s Kennedy School of Government.

PERF’s success is built on the active involve-ment of its members. The organization also hastypes of membership that allow it to benefit fromthe diverse views of criminal justice researchers, lawenforcement professionals of all ranks, and otherscommitted to advancing policing services to allcommunities. PERF is committed to the applica-tion of research in policing and to promoting inno-vation that will enhance the quality of life in ourcommunities. PERF’s objective is to improve thedelivery of police services and the effectiveness ofcrime control through the exercise of strongnational leadership, the public debate of criminaljustice issues, the development of a body ofresearch about policing, and the provision of vitalmanagement services to all police agencies.

PERF has developed and published some ofthe leading literature in the law enforcement field.Recently, PERF’s work on the increase in violentcrime during the past two years has receivednational attention. A series of reports in the “Criti-cal Issues in Policing” series—A Gathering Storm—Violent Crime in America; 24 Months of AlarmingTrends; and Violent Crime in America: A Tale of TwoCities—provides in-depth analysis of the extent andnature of violent crime and countermeasures thathave been undertaken by police. In addition, PERFrecently released two publications on contempo-rary law enforcement issues. The books—entitledExploring the Challenges of Police Use of Force andPolice Management of Mass Demonstrations: Identi-fying Issues and Successful Approaches—serve aspractical guides to help police leaders make moreinformed decisions. In addition, PERF has releaseda series of white papers on terrorism in the local lawenforcement context, Protecting Your Communityfrom Terrorism: Strategies for Local Law Enforce-ment, which examined such issues as local-federal

About the Police ExecutiveResearch Forum

About the Police Executive Research Forum — 37

partnerships, working with diverse communities,bioterrorism, and intelligence sharing. Other recentpublications include Managing a MultijurisdictionalCase: Identifying Lessons Learned from the SniperInvestigation (2004) and Community Policing: ThePast, Present and Future (2004). Other PERF titlesinclude the only authoritative work on racial profil-ing, Racial Profiling: A Principled Response (2001);Recognizing Value in Policing (2002); The PoliceResponse to Mental Illness (2002); Citizen ReviewResource Manual (1995); Managing Innovation inPolicing (1995); Crime Analysis Through Computer

Mapping (1995); And Justice For All: Understandingand Controlling Police Use of Deadly Force (1995);Why Police Organizations Change: A Study of Com-munity-Oriented Policing (1996); and PoliceAntidrug Tactics: New Approaches and Applications(1996). PERF publications are used for training andpromotion exams and to inform police profession-als about innovative approaches to communityproblems. The hallmark of the program is translat-ing the latest research and thinking about a topicinto police practices that can be tailored to theunique needs of a jurisdiction.

To learn more about PERF, visit www.policeforum.org.

38 — About Motorola

About Motorola and theMotorola Foundation

MOTOROLA IS KNOWN AROUND THE WORLD FOR

innovation in communications. The companydevelops technologies, products and services thatmake mobile experiences possible. Its portfolioincludes communications infrastructure, enterprisemobility solutions, digital set-tops, cable modems,mobile devices and Bluetooth accessories. Motorolais committed to delivering next generation commu-nication solutions to people, businesses and gov-ernments. A Fortune 100 company with globalpresence and impact, Motorola had sales of $36.6billion in 2007.

Today, Motorola comprises three businessunits: Enterprise Mobility Solutions, Home & Net-works Mobility, and Mobile Devices.

Enterprise Mobility Solutions includes themission-critical communications offered by ourgovernment and public safety sectors and ourenterprise mobility business, including analog anddigital two-way radio as well as voice and data com-munications products and systems. Motorola deliv-ers mobile computing, advanced data capture,wireless infrastructure and RFID solutions not onlyto clients in the public sector, but also to retail,manufacturing, wholesale distribution, healthcare,travel and transportation customers worldwide.

Home & Networks Mobility provides inte-grated, end-to-end systems that seamlessly and

reliably enable uninterrupted access to digitalentertainment, information and communicationsservices over a variety of wired and wireless solu-tions. Motorola provides digital video system solu-tions and interactive set-top devices, voice and datamodems for digital subscriber line and cable net-works, and broadband access systems (includingcellular infrastructure systems) for cable and satel-lite television operators, wireline carriers and wire-less service providers.

Mobile Devices has transformed the cellphone into an icon of personal technology—anintegral part of daily communications, data man-agement and mobile entertainment. Motorolaoffers innovative product handset and accessorydesigns that deliver “must have” experiences, suchas mobile music and video—enabling seamlessconnectivity at work or at play.

The Motorola Foundation is the independentcharitable and philanthropic arm of Motorola.With employees located around the globe,Motorola seeks to benefit the communities where itoperates. The company achieves this by makingstrategic grants, forging strong community part-nerships, fostering innovation and engaging stake-holders. Motorola Foundation focuses its fundingon education, especially science, technology, engi-neering and math programming.

For more information go to www.motorola.com.