Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Presented By Angela Chan, Staff AttorneyJuvenile Justice and Education Project
1. This year marks the 20th anniversary of San Francisco's Sanctuary Ordinance. What is it? What is its purpose?
2. How have the recent media attacks on the Sanctuary Ordinance resulted in San Francisco referring over 160 immigrant youth to Immigration and Customs Enforcement?
3. How is San Francisco’s immigrant community responding to these attacks?
What is the Sanctuary Ordinance?
Prohibits use of local employees or resources to assist with federal immigration enforcement.
There are over 80 counties or cities with Sanctuary or Sanctuary-like policies.
3
• 1985: Mayor Dianne Feinstein signed legislation passed by the Board of Supervisors that designated San Francisco as a sanctuary city for immigrants, who fled civil war and political persecution in El Salvador and Guatemala, but were unable to gain asylum in the United States.
• 1989: Four years later, San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors unanimously extended the policy to all immigrants. The city could not use its resources or funds to assist immigration law enforcement, except where required by federal law.
What is the purpose of the Sanctuary Ordinance?
Public Safety
Nondiscrimination Policy
Civic Engagement
• 1996: Juvenile Probation issues a policy towards undocumented youth. INS (now known as ICE) is aware of this policy:• Juveniles, who are suspected of being
undocumented, are not referred to INS by Juvenile Probation unless there is an immigration hold on a youth or the probation officer requests and receives permission from the court to report the youth.
• Undocumented youth are treated the same as other youth and receive similar dispositions, e.g., probation, group homes, county and state facilities.
• If there is a placement failure, probation officers may request that the judge allow the probation officer to repatriate the youth with his or her family in accordance with state law.
• June – July 2008: SF Chronicle publishes a series of “special reports” about the undocumented youth issue under the title “Sanctuary Shielding Immigrants.” Here are some of the headlines:
• Feds probe S.F.'s migrant-offender shield 06/29/08 (Chronicle)
• 8 crack dealers shielded by S.F. walk away 07/01/08 (Chronicle)
• EDITORIAL: No sanctuary for drug dealers 07/03/08 (Chronicle)
• S.F. mayor shifts policy on illegal offenders 07/03/08 (Chronicle)
• S.F. working on protocol for teen illegals 07/10/08 (Chronicle)
• S.F. juvenile hall braces for detainee surge 07/04/08 (Chronicle)
• S.F. IDs 10 possible illegal youths to feds 07/12/08 (Chronicle)
• San Francisco cooperates with feds on immigration 07/13/08 (Chronicle)
• Slaying suspect once found sanctuary in SF 07/20/08 (Chronicle)
• Opinion: Sanctuary policy made city less safe 07/22/08 (Chronicle)
• Minutemen protest S.F.'s sanctuary policy 07/31/08 (Chronicle)
• S.F. fund aids teen felons who are illegals 08/03/08 (Chronicle)
• Panel urges S.F. to help teen immigrant felons 08/19/08 (Chronicle)
• Family blames sanctuary policy in 3 slayings 08/23/08 (Chronicle)
• San Francisco Chronicle articles• Mayor Gavin Newsom runs for governor• The Bush Administration cracks down on immigration enforcement
• The National Fugitive Operations – Fastest growing program in the DHS immigration enforcement program with a budget that increased from $9 million in 2003 to $218 million last year. In its first five years, the program has received more than $625 million.
• May 2008 – ICE raids 11 El Balazo Restaurants and detains 63 alleged undocumented persons in San Francisco, San Ramon, Lafayette, Concord, Pleasanton and Danville.
• May 2008 through April 2009 - ICE raids the homes of several San Francisco families, forcibly entering their residences without warrants.
• U.S. Attorney Joseph Russoniello (who was also a U.S. Attorney in the 1980’s) threatens San Francisco with prosecution for harboring undocumented youth.
July 2008: Juvenile Probation implements new policy requiring that probation officers refer youth suspected of being undocumented to ICE right after arrest:• BEFORE youth are appointed a public defender.• BEFORE youth receive due process.• BASED on felony charges from the police, not a court
finding of guilt.
To Date: According to ICE, over 167 youth have been referred to ICE by Juvenile Probation under the Mayor’s policy.
Mayor Newsom’s Policy -
Implemented in July 2008
Sup. Campos’ Policy – Passed in Nov. 2009
What are the problems with the Mayor’s July 2008 policy?
(1) The new policy is modeled after the adult criminal justice system, and violates well-established juvenile law and procedure.
(2) Automatic referral at booking to ICE will result in premature and erroneous referrals, and will dismantle crucial protections against racial profiling and pre-textual arrests.
Notifying ICE at booking will result in reporting youth who have not committed an offense. According to San Francisco juvenile probation, in 2006, 30% or 361 of the 1215 petitions filed by the District Attorney’s did not result in a sustained petition.
(3) Probation officers are not qualified to determine immigration status. Determination of immigration status is complex, and youth themselves are often
unaware of their own status. The new process subjects the City to potential liability because youth who have legal immigration status may be mistakenly referred to ICE. (See, e.g., Soto-Torres v. Johnson, CIV S-99-1695 WBS/DAD (E.D. Cal. filed Aug. 30, 1999) (County and federal officials paid $100,000 to settle case after county probation officer made erroneous determination).
(4) With respect to youth who have family in the United States, the City’s policy runs counter to the family reunification goals of the juvenile system mandated by state law.
Youth who have lived their entire lives in the U.S. will be orphaned by a blanket policy that refers all youth to ICE regardless of their particular circumstances.
(5) The policy undermines the ability of undocumented youth to pursue immigration relief to which they may be entitled under federal law.
Congress has created several means by which undocumented youth may apply to adjust their immigration status, including Special Immigrant Juvenile Status for children who have been abused, abandoned or neglected; asylum for children who have been persecuted in their countries of origin; “T” visas for children who are the victims of trafficking; and “U” visas for children who are the victims of enumerated crimes.
Notifying ICE at the booking stage will effectively cut off these avenues of federal immigration relief for a majority of eligible youth. ICE neither screens youth for potential forms of relief nor provides them with immigration attorneys. ICE also often transfers youth to detention facilities in remote areas without legal service agencies, making it virtually impossible for them to assert a viable claim for relief.
• Formed in Fall 2008, the San Francisco Immigrant Rights Defense Committee is a growing alliance of immigrant rights advocates, labor groups, faith leaders, youth advocates, and LGBT activists.
• The Committee includes: The African Immigrant and Refugee Resource Center, ALDI, Arab Resource and Organizing Center, Asian Law Caucus, Asian Youth Advocacy Network, Central American Resource Center, Chinese for Affirmative Action, Communities United Against Violence, Dolores Street Community Services, EBASE, Global Exchange, Filipino Community Center, Harvey Milk LGBT Democratic Club, H.O.M.E.Y., Immigrant Legal Resource Center, Instituto Familiar de la Raza, La Raza Centro Legal, La Voz Latina, Legal Services for Children, Movement for Unconditional Amnesty, Mujeres Unidas y Activas, National Lawyers Guild--San Francisco Chapter, PODER, POWER, Pride at Work, SF Immigrant Legal & Education Network, SF Labor Council, SFOP, St. Peter’s Housing, Tenderloin Housing Clinic, Worker Immigrant Rights Coalition, Young Workers United.
• In November 2009, hundreds of immigrant community members were successful in passing a new policy at the Board of Supervisors, by a vote of 8 to 3, to restore due process to immigrant youth.• Under the new policy, juvenile probation can only report
youth to ICE AFTER a judge finds that the youth actually committed a felony.
• BUT Mayor Newsom is refusing to follow this new policy, and City Attorney Herrera will not advise implementation.
15
Four rallies at City Hall Townhall meeting with City
Officials Meetings with members of
the Board of Supervisors Meetings with Mayor’s Office Meeting with SF Chronicle’s
Editorial Board Resolutions Passed by the
Immigrant Rights Commission, Youth Commission, and SF Democratic Party
Highlighting specific cases were the outcome was extremely unjust – e.g., Washington family case
What’s NextWhat’s Next?
STAND UP FOR IMMIGRANT YOUTH!
Call Mayor Newsom at (415) 554-6141 to:Demand that San Francisco follow the new policy
and stop tearing apart innocent families.
To learn or to get involved, please contact [email protected].
For More Information : Angela Chan, Staff Attorney
Asian Law CaucusWebsite: www.asianlawcaucus.org
Blog: www.arcof72.comE-mail: [email protected]
For Pro Bono Opportunities:Contact: [email protected]
