Not Just Arizona: Immigration Enforcement Out of Control on Federal Level
Saturday 01 May 2010
by: Bill Quigley, t r u t h o u t | News Analysis

(Photo: Thomas Hawk / Flickr)
While people protest the terrible Arizona state law that uses local law enforcement to target immigrants, the federal government is expanding its efforts to use local law enforcement in immigration enforcement and has launched a major PR campaign to defend it.
One example of the out-of-control federal program occurred last week in Maryland. Florinda Lorenzo-Desimilian, a 26-year-old married mother of three, lives in Prince George's County Maryland. Last week, she was arrested in her home by local police on a misdemeanor charge of selling $2 phone cards out of her apartment window without a license.
Lorenzo-Desimilian was booked at the county jail. During booking, she was fingerprinted. Local police sent her prints to the FBI, which, in turn, notified ICE (US Immigration and Customs Enforcement) that she had overstayed her work visa. Even though her three children are US citizens, ICE kept her in jail for two days and is now trying to deport her.
This is the result of a federal ICE and Homeland Security program called "Secure Communities," which is supposed to be targeting violent criminals. Instead, this program is really operating a dragnet, scooping up and deporting tens of thousands of immigrants, like Lorenzo-Desimilian, who are no security risk to anyone.
Congress provided funding to ICE and the Department of Homeland Security in 2008 to "identify aliens convicted of a crime, sentenced to imprisonment, who may be deportable, and remove them from the US once they are judged deportable."
ICE said this program "supports public safety by strengthening efforts to identify and remove the most dangerous criminal aliens from the United States."
However, ICE is not actually targeting convicted criminal aliens, dangerous aliens or even violent aliens. They are targeting everyone.
ICE, through Secure Communities contracts with local law enforcement offices, runs every accused person's fingerprints through multiple databases, regardless of how minor the charges. Thus, people like Lorenzo-Desimilian are subject to ICE investigation, detention and deportation.
Monday, 45 people protested with the human rights organization CASA Maryland against the ICE actions aimed at Lorenzo-Desimilian. Maryland State Rep. Del Victor Ramirez challenged the Secure Communities sweeps in a statement to the Maryland Gazette. "She's not a threat. Should you really be deporting a nonviolent mother of three? There are much bigger problems we could be using our resources for."
This ICE program is now operating in 165 jurisdictions in 20 states and aims to be in partnership with every local law enforcement office in the country in a few years. ICE admits that, in its first one-year period, almost one million people were fingerprinted under this program. About one percent, or 11,000 people, were identified as immigrants arrested - arrested not convicted - for major crimes. Most of the people deported by ICE were picked up for minor or traffic charges and not violent crimes. As The Washington Post revealed in March, ICE has explicit internal goals to remove 150,000 immigrants through the "criminal alien removals" and to deport 250,000 others this year.
Basic information about the ICE Secure Communities program has never seen the light of day. Questions like: What are the error rates? What is the cost? How is oversight done? What about accountability for racial profiling? These and other questions have not been publicly disclosed. That is why the National Day Laborer Organizing Network, the Center for Constitutional Rights and the Immigration Justice Clinic of Benjamin Cardozo School of Law filed a federal Freedom of Information Act case against ICE and others this week.
Protests aimed at the Secure Communities programs have occurred this week in Houston; Washington, DC; New York; Miami; Atlanta; Raleigh; San Bernardino; and Maryland. Critics say the program makes the public less safe, not more, because it effectively blurs the role between local law enforcement and ICE agents seeking to deport immigrants. Protestors challenge that the program deports people before they are even found guilty of committing a crime or even if the arrest was illegal or later dropped. They seek a moratorium on all ICE-local law enforcement partnerships until basic facts about the program are disclosed, debated and evaluated. They created a web site of information here.
ICE responded to these protests with a six-page, internal media plan, which included targeted op-eds in "major newspapers in the right cities where protests are planned." The ICE media memo indicated it also arranged ICE interviews with The New York Times, The Associated Press, La Opinion, Telemundo and the BBC.
Regional ICE offices were directed to "reach out to English and Spanish language reporters initially in the eight cities where protests are planned Monday, April 23, to discuss the program and highlight its successes in that local area." The ICE memo listed sound bites and talking points including "Secure Communities is not about immigration. It's about information sharing with local law enforcement ..."
The ICE media plan also states, incredibly, on page five, "To date, ICE has not received any complaints of racial profiling." That would be real news to people across the country including Lorenzo-Desimilian and CASA Maryland.
As the Arizona experience shows us, combining local law enforcement and federal immigration can prove to be quite toxic. Perhaps, if ICE would stop spending money on PR to defend its lack of transparency and spend it instead on sharing information about the program so it could be fairly evaluated, the public would be better served.

This work by Truthout is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 United States License.



Comments
This forum is moderated by software. Please allow up to 15 minutes for your comments to go live and avoid posting the same comment multiple times.
Mr Quigly, Why did
Sat, 05/01/2010 - 13:10 — Anonymous (not verified)Mr Quigly, Why did Loranzo-Desimian have three [3] children while she was here on a work visa? Does she have a husband? With all things considered, she is here as an illegal alien. We have millions of them here, and they are ruining our economy.
It would be the same if she was the wife of the Mexican President. and the "Anchor baby" law is as stupid as most of our politicians in Washington.
You cry-babies are NOT Americans, You look for some tiny, insignificant item to scream about just to get attention. Arizona is in the right, they are drowning in illegals, many of which are criminals. Let us do away with them all. and the sooner the better.
It is my understanding that
Sat, 05/01/2010 - 13:48 — midwest Tom (not verified)It is my understanding that legislature in Ohio, Oklahoma, and Texas are all panning on introducing the same immigration control laws. Maybe we should limit Aid For Dependent Children to 100% for the first child born out of wedlock; 70% for the second such child, and no more thereafter. The products of single parent households now produce over 80% of our jailed population.
What do you not understand
Sat, 05/01/2010 - 14:56 — Anonymous (not verified)What do you not understand about being here illegal. Who cares if you were picked up and booked for any other crime. She overstayed her visa and should have left the county.
I would also suggest we do away with the citizenship based on being born in the US, unless your parents are also citizens. We are one of the only nations still allow this farce to occur.
The problem with this
Sat, 05/01/2010 - 15:08 — Steve (not verified)The problem with this program isn't the fact that it deports illegal aliens. It's the fact that it misdirects resources meant to deport dangerous illegal aliens into deporting harmless ones.
The skewed and highly
Sat, 05/01/2010 - 15:17 — Uppity Woman (not verified)The skewed and highly suspect "morality" of those who have been brainwashed by patriarchal dominator religions is on full display here today in our comments. I know that the control freaks in our midst like to have nice, neat, tidy borders, distinct roles for men and women where women are powerless and must depend on men, and a racial hierarchy with white folks at the top. It must frustrate you all terribly that you just can't get anyone with a real conscience to go along with your fake morality anymore.
Sorry, but all Illegal
Sat, 05/01/2010 - 15:42 — Anonymous (not verified)Sorry, but all Illegal Immigrants are a danger to all of us..in that we need the jobs that they take. If all the Employers that hire them had to hire Legal citizens, they would scream to high heaven . So I say, deport the Illegals and Jail the Employers that hire them . That is the only fair way. If the jobs were not available, they would not come ! It is time for our government to start looking out for the true citizens of this country...you know...the ones that Pay All The Taxes that this government squanders on trumped-up wars and supporting Illegals with benefits that the rest of us cannot access...like a damned livable wage.
Sorry, but all Illegal: If
Sat, 05/01/2010 - 16:48 — Anonymous (not verified)Sorry, but all Illegal:
If you can find people who will do the jobs that the illegals are doing in the fields right now then your comment has merit... I don't think you want to pay the resulting food price increases or work in the fields for the wages that are payed for those jobs. Talk about wrecking the economy tsk tsk
We all should realize that the whole issue is more complicated than any want to admit.. especially the politicians who want to get elected by pretending to be on one side or the other.
Even more fundamental: Check
Sat, 05/01/2010 - 18:55 — RRJ (not verified)Even more fundamental: Check "Immigration Gumballs" at YouTube.
No one should talk about this until they have an understanding of the effect of immigration on population.
Spread the word.
I am sorry but we have laws
Sat, 05/01/2010 - 20:20 — Anonymous (not verified)I am sorry but we have laws on how to enter this country and if you choose to sneak in illegally you should be thrown out. The laws should be changed as far as those anchor babies are concerned as well. The tax payers are the ones who end up supporting these brats. It is time we stand up and don't let these hispanics run this country. It is clear that they want to make it over into a third world country like they come from. They don't obey the laws, they are always waiting for handouts and I am sick and tired of it. I acknowledge that there are certainly illegals from many other countries but hell, they are swarming in across the southern border. While we are at it, give the Puerto Ricans back their country to govern themselves and send the lot of them back too, in the North East we deal with their gangs constantly. Murders on a daily basis by these thugs.
I'd guess she was selling
Sat, 05/01/2010 - 22:30 — Anonymous (not verified)I'd guess she was selling phone cards to supplement her welfare check. If she had a job, the author would have said so.
Most of those arrested are released for their hearing and never show up. That is the problem.
Why does Truthout keeping posting this Bushite propaganda?
You see, "immigration" is
Sat, 05/01/2010 - 23:28 — Anonymous (not verified)You see, "immigration" is really being used as an excuse to treat other human beings like dogs. It's disgusting, and coporate America is gaming this outbreak of hate. I mean really kids, this is how it worked with notorious facists in the 20th century:
A group of people by decree, are illegal, therefore we can do what we wish to them.
More immigration sounds good, keep career professionals on the same "team" - a good lever against corporate violence.
Everybody gets in, we all
Sat, 05/01/2010 - 23:30 — Anonymous (not verified)Everybody gets in, we all compete equally. That way we can beat back the tyrants. 100% Open Borders
Well ... I'm really on no
Sun, 05/02/2010 - 01:13 — Anonymous (not verified)Well ... I'm really on no one's side on this article and board. For one, I don't think this is about single mothers, Puerto Ricans, or people on welfare trying to supplement a very meager allowance from the government. Plus, if she doesn't have papers, she's not receiving welfare -- because they've been checking citizenship in more recent years. (Though I do question why a poorer single woman -- of any nationality -- would have 3 children in this day and age of family planning education. I could understand one child, maybe two if she was divorced. But to go and have 3 kids with no husband and no money? Of course, the Catholic Church doesn't care too much about that, does it? And even Mexico has about the same birth rate as the U.S. and since a family planning program started in the 1970's. Mexico is NOT a 3rd world country, by any stretch of the imagination. Which is another reason my heart is NOT bleeding.) But back on topic, I think our borders should be enforced. This kind of corporate take over of our borders is unacceptable. It's dangerous to our national security, there are millions of Americans out of work and unable to find jobs right now. And there -- on May Day -- they're marching -- millions ILLEGALLY with jobs and signs that say, "We work for America." It's extremely offensive to me. How about a May Day March with the millions of Americans UNEMPLOYED? I find this very disingenously manipulative -- "racist", "jobs that Americans that don't want", and the rest of the mythological rhetoric.
On the internet, they are saying there is a boycott of Mexico. I am supporting that boycott. I was in my supermarket today and the price of salsa from Mexico had dropped dramatically because no one is buying. I was tempted, naturally, but then I realized it was because the boycott i'd heard about. So I didn't buy it.
Arizona? Why should I boycott Arizona?
Notice that they're not boycotting the companies that HIRE ILLEGALLY.
When was the last time the truthout people and the rest of their liberal friends told an American they didn't really need a job? In so many words, expression, or less .. ?
A May March with the
Sun, 05/02/2010 - 01:30 — whaler (not verified)A May March with the millions of unemployed Americans carrying signs that say:
"We DON'T work for America. WHY NOT?"
"I have a real social security number"
"I am a parent"
"I have a degree"
"I have a student loan that didn't lead to a job"
"I never bought a house"
"I'm in foreclosure"
"I don't have health care"
"I'm homeless because of medical bills"
"I'm in high school and don't have a paying job. I need to make money for college"
"My child was denied a scholarship that was supposed to be based on income"
"I'm an invisible middle aged mother"
"I'm an invisible middle aged single man without a pension"
"I don't have any savings. I'm a month away from the street."
"We DON'T work for America, Obama. WHY NOT?"
"I was educated in the
Sun, 05/02/2010 - 01:44 — whaler (not verified)"I was educated in the American public school system. Why isn't my country cashing in on its investment in me?"
"Real Social Security Number: Unemployed 15 months"
"Real Social Security Number: Unemployed 28 months"
"Real Social Security Number: Unemployed 3 years"
"Real Social Security number: Unemployed 9 years"
"Real Social Security Number: Unemployed 7 years"
"Real Social Security Number: Unemployed 1 1/2 years"
"We all went through the American public school system."
"We DON'T work for America, Obama. WHY NOT?"
I'm sorry, but what part of
Sun, 05/02/2010 - 01:56 — Anonymous (not verified)I'm sorry, but what part of "married mother of three" don't you understand? (see 2nd paragraph - you didn't even have to read that far and apparently you understood that she has children -- oh my!)
With the exception of a couple who understand that it is capital and not the workers who are at fault, most of you are nitpicking -- is she married? is she collecting welfare? why does she have three kids? -- and not addressing the issue.
Every time we limit someone's civil rights (legal or not), we begin to limit our own. Why don't some of you ask your grandparents why your ancestors came to this country? Unless, of course, you are Native American or Mexican; in that case, your countrymen and women were here before the grand "we" (code for white Americans) were. Oh!
If you are in the country
Sun, 05/02/2010 - 02:14 — gilreathm (not verified)If you are in the country illegally please be so kind as to not break more laws. Behave yourself. If you break more laws, whether or not you have children who are citizens, matters not to me. You become no different from citizens who break laws and are sent to prison. They too are separated from their children, many of whom end up with relatives or in foster care. You do not get sent to prison, you get deported. Thats just the way it is for law breakers.
Jobs for everyone, I'm sorry
Sun, 05/02/2010 - 08:15 — Anonymous (not verified)Jobs for everyone, I'm sorry Florinda Lorenzo-Desimilian didn't have a cushy 6 figure salary with a defense contractor. Nothing against those jobs at all - give everybody their basic human needs and rights. Speaking of the right, they are filled with fear, and always have been, that if "we don't get ours, some invader is going to take it away."
Our own captive corporate Government does enourmous damage making sure the wealthiest preserve their wealth, narry a complaint about 1 Trillion in next years buidget for defense.
The "enforcement": and all
Sun, 05/02/2010 - 08:18 — Anonymous (not verified)The "enforcement": and all the "gravy" that comes with it, really makes the police state a lucrative corporate growth opportunity. Some of these companies contracted in the lock 'em up industry behave like Coca Cola, agressively marketing police brutality since they have been given the green light to harvest "illegals". It's subtle, but it's a sure sign this country is in huge trouble.
Funny isn't it. If you
Sun, 05/02/2010 - 08:20 — Anonymous (not verified)Funny isn't it. If you happen to be "rich" enough, you can completely avoid the inconvenience of immigration. It's true, bring lots of money, you're in. Good ol' 'Murican values.
The only thing that
Sun, 05/02/2010 - 13:00 — Adoregon (not verified)The only thing that prevented the Native American Peoples (aka Indians or indigenes) from declaring the Europeans "illegal aliens" and running their rapacious asses out of North America was the fact the Europeans possessed "advanced weapons technology."
For all the yapping about peace, freedom and democracy, ultimately it comes down to the ability to kill people who do not agree with you, who are simply "in your way," or who have what you want, whether land or resources.
This is how the people who "founded" the U.S. behaved and how the U.S. continues to behave.
What a pathetic joke.
Perhaps it would also
Sun, 05/02/2010 - 19:31 — Anonymous (not verified)Perhaps it would also behoove all of us to understand that one of the reasons people from Mexico and Latin America risk their lives and then their freedom to enter the US is because of our own policies that have caused the destruction of their own economies. NAFTA for example has resulted in the destruction large portions of the corn farming industry in Southern Mexico, just as CAFTA destroyed the rice farmers in Haiti because of the sale of our own subsidized corn and rice products. As former President Clinton finally acknowledged, it is time that people in the US take responsibility for the role we play in causing migration by undermining the industries that employ workers in other countries.
I think all these foreigners
Mon, 05/03/2010 - 00:16 — Carl (not verified)I think all these foreigners should protest by going back home. Can you imagine their shock when those in USA expect their govt to enforce the laws designed to protect its citizens.