Skokie strengthens immigration protections ordinance
Though not officially labeled as a Welcoming City on paper, the Skokie Village Board approved measures to restrict assisting federal immigration agents in certain cases. The village will also be able to give limited help to those in the immigration booking system.
The updated Human Relations Chapter of the village's code does not conflict with federal law, as it still requires the village and its police department to assist federal officers in serving criminal warrants, officials said. The Village Board unanimously approved the changes to the village's code at its March 17 meeting.
The new addendums in the Human Relations chapter state that the village shall not assist immigration officers who do not have a criminal warrant, assist in information sharing, arrest or detain someone based solely on their immigration status.
The village is also mandated to notify foreign nationals of their right to contact consulates within 48 hours of their booking, support programs available for immigrants who are victims of qualifying crimes and who are potential witnesses for prosecution of a crime, and to respond promptly to requests for visa supporting documents and visa certifications.
Those mandates and restrictions were already in practice in Skokie, according to Mayor George Van Dusen, but the Village Board approved updating to reinforce its stance.
Under President Donald Trump's first term in office, the Village Board approved amendments to its Human Relations chapter in 2017 to create safe zones in health care facilities, schools and universities. Michael Lorge, the village's corporation counsel said at the time that the village granted legal protections to its residents that are commonly seen in 'sanctuary cities.'
Van Dusen defended the integrity of the 2017 protections at a Village Board meeting Feb. 3, and said the Board created those protections before the state approved the TRUST Act.
The subject came back to the Village Board as an honorary proclamation at the Feb. 18 meeting reiterating the village's support for all immigrants.
'Mr. Tsao, with (ICIRR) made some suggestions to us,' Van Dusen said after the proclamation was read by Trustee Khem Khouen. 'In the (Police) Chief's guidance, he states the following, 'Under prohibited activities: No compliance with immigration detainers, administrative warrants or custody transfers without a criminal warrant. No sharing of information about individuals in custody, including release dates.''
'Under stops, arrests and detentions: No stops, searches, arrests or detentions based solely on immigration status.'
'The Chief reiterates, ICE administrative warrants do not justify arrests or detentions,' Van Dusen said. 'Individuals in custody cannot be denied services, benefits or programs based on immigration status.'
'Facilities must notify foreign nationals of the right to contact consulates within 48 hours of booking,' he said.
Van Dusen said the police department does so to build community trust and treat all individuals equitably, regardless of immigration status.
Khoeun thanked Van Dusen for explaining the ordinance publicly, and filed a motion to clarify the village's intentions in its Human Relations Chapter. 'We want to make sure that it's explicit so that we're future-proofing it as well, regardless of who's here,' she said, while adding to her motion a provision for the village to work with ICIRR to be proactive in making changes to the village's code if necessary.
The motion was seconded by Trustee Keith Robinson; the Village Board had approved a first reading of it on March 3.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
7 hours ago
Democratic states double down on laws resisting Trump's immigration crackdown
As President Donald Trump's administration targets states and local governments for not cooperating with federal immigration authorities, lawmakers in some Democratic-led states are intensifying their resistance by strengthening state laws restricting such cooperation. In California alone, more than a dozen pro-immigrant bills passed either the Assembly or Senate this week, including one prohibiting schools from allowing federal immigration officials into nonpublic areas without a judicial warrant. Other state measures have sought to protect immigrants in housing, employment and police encounters, even as Trump's administration has ramped up arrests as part of his plan for mass deportations. In Connecticut, legislation pending before Democratic Gov. Ned Lamont would expand a law that already limits when law enforcement officers can cooperate with federal requests to detain immigrants. Among other things, it would let 'any aggrieved person' sue municipalities for alleged violations of the state's Trust Act. Two days after lawmakers gave final approval to the measure, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security included Connecticut on a list of hundreds of 'sanctuary jurisdictions' obstructing the enforcement of federal immigration laws. The list later was removed from the department's website after criticism that it errantly included some local governments that support Trump's immigration policies. Since taking office in January, Trump has enlisted hundreds of state and local law enforcement agencies to help identify immigrants in the U.S. illegally and detain them for potential deportation. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement now lists 640 such cooperative agreements, a nearly fivefold increase under Trump. Trump also has lifted longtime rules restricting immigration enforcement near schools, churches and hospitals, and ordered federal prosecutors to investigate state or local officials believed to be interfering with his crackdown on illegal immigration. The Department of Justice sued Colorado, Illinois and New York, as well as several cities in those states and New Jersey, alleging their policies violate the U.S. Constitution or federal immigration laws. Just three weeks after Colorado was sued, Democratic Gov. Jared Polis signed a wide-ranging law expanding the state's protections for immigrants. Among other things, it bars jails from delaying the release of inmates for immigration enforcement and allows penalties of up to $50,000 for public schools, colleges, libraries, child care centers and health care facilities that collect information about people's immigration status, with some exceptions. Polis rejected the administration's description of Colorado as a 'sanctuary state,' asserting that law officers remain 'deeply committed' to working with federal authorities on criminal investigations. 'But to be clear, state and local law enforcement cannot be commandeered to enforce federal civil immigration laws,' Polis said in a bill-signing statement. Illinois also has continued to press pro-immigrant legislation. A bill recently given final approval says no child can be denied a free public education because of immigration status — something already guaranteed nationwide under a 1982 U.S. Supreme Court decision. Supporters say the state legislation provides a backstop in case court precedent is overturned. The bill also requires schools to develop policies on handling requests from federal immigration officials and allows lawsuits for alleged violations of the measure. Democratic-led states are pursuing a wide range of means to protect immigrants. A new Oregon law bars landlords from inquiring about the immigration status of tenants or applicants. New laws in Washington declare it unprofessional conduct for bail bond agents to enforce civil immigration warrants, prohibit employers from using immigration status to threaten workers and let employees use paid sick leave to attend immigration proceedings for themselves or family members. Vermont last month repealed a state law that let law enforcement agencies enter into immigration enforcement agreements with federal authorities during state or national emergencies. They now need special permission from the governor to do so. As passed by the House, Maryland legislation also would have barred local governments from reaching immigration enforcement agreements with the federal government. That provision was removed in the Senate following pushback from some of the seven Maryland counties that currently have agreements. The final version, which took effect as law at the start of June, forbids public schools and libraries from granting federal immigration authorities access to nonpublic areas without a judicial warrant or 'exigent circumstances.' Maryland Del. Nicole Williams said residents' concerns about Trump's immigration policies prompted her to sponsor the legislation. 'We believe that diversity is our strength, and our role as elected officials is to make sure that all of the residents within our community — regardless of their background — feel safe and comfortable,' Williams said. Though legislation advancing in Democratic states may shield against Trump's policies, 'I would say it's more so to send a message to immigrant communities to let them know that they are welcome,' said Juan Avilez, a policy associate at the American Immigration Council, a nonprofit advocacy group. In California, a law that took effect in 2018 already requires public schools to adopt policies 'limiting assistance with immigration enforcement to the fullest extent possible.' Some schools have readily applied the law. When DHS officers attempted a welfare check on migrant children at two Los Angeles elementary schools in April, they were denied access by both principals. Legislation passed by the state Senate would reinforce such policies by specifically requiring a judicial warrant for public schools to let immigration authorities into nonpublic areas, allow students to be questioned or disclose information about students and their families. 'Having ICE in our schools means that you'll have parents who will not want to send their kids to school at all,' Democratic state Sen. Scott Wiener said in support of the bill. But some Republicans said the measure was 'injecting partisan immigration policies' into schools. 'We have yet to see a case in California where we have scary people in masks entering schools and ripping children away,' said state Sen. Marie Alvarado-Gil. 'Let's stop these fear tactics that do us an injustice.'
Hamilton Spectator
7 hours ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Democratic states double down on laws resisting Trump's immigration crackdown
As President Donald Trump's administration targets states and local governments for not cooperating with federal immigration authorities, lawmakers in some Democratic-led states are intensifying their resistance by strengthening state laws restricting such cooperation. In California alone, more than a dozen pro-immigrant bills passed either the Assembly or Senate this week, including one prohibiting schools from allowing federal immigration officials into nonpublic areas without a judicial warrant. Other state measures have sought to protect immigrants in housing, employment and police encounters, even as Trump's administration has ramped up arrests as part of his plan for mass deportations. In Connecticut, legislation pending before Democratic Gov. Ned Lamont would expand a law that already limits when law enforcement officers can cooperate with federal requests to detain immigrants. Among other things, it would let 'any aggrieved person' sue municipalities for alleged violations of the state's Trust Act. Two days after lawmakers gave final approval to the measure, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security included Connecticut on a list of hundreds of 'sanctuary jurisdictions' obstructing the enforcement of federal immigration laws. The list later was removed from the department's website after criticism that it errantly included some local governments that support Trump's immigration policies. States split on whether to aid or resist Trump Since taking office in January, Trump has enlisted hundreds of state and local law enforcement agencies to help identify immigrants in the U.S. illegally and detain them for potential deportation. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement now lists 640 such cooperative agreements, a nearly fivefold increase under Trump. Trump also has lifted longtime rules restricting immigration enforcement near schools , churches and hospitals, and ordered federal prosecutors to investigate state or local officials believed to be interfering with his crackdown on illegal immigration. The Department of Justice sued Colorado, Illinois and New York, as well as several cities in those states and New Jersey , alleging their policies violate the U.S. Constitution or federal immigration laws. Just three weeks after Colorado was sued, Democratic Gov. Jared Polis signed a wide-ranging law expanding the state's protections for immigrants. Among other things, it bars jails from delaying the release of inmates for immigration enforcement and allows penalties of up to $50,000 for public schools, colleges, libraries, child care centers and health care facilities that collect information about people's immigration status, with some exceptions. Polis rejected the administration's description of Colorado as a 'sanctuary state,' asserting that law officers remain 'deeply committed' to working with federal authorities on criminal investigations. 'But to be clear, state and local law enforcement cannot be commandeered to enforce federal civil immigration laws,' Polis said in a bill-signing statement. Illinois also has continued to press pro-immigrant legislation. A bill recently given final approval says no child can be denied a free public education because of immigration status — something already guaranteed nationwide under a 1982 U.S. Supreme Court decision . Supporters say the state legislation provides a backstop in case court precedent is overturned. The bill also requires schools to develop policies on handling requests from federal immigration officials and allows lawsuits for alleged violations of the measure. Legislation supporting immigrants takes a variety of forms Democratic-led states are pursuing a wide range of means to protect immigrants. A new Oregon law bars landlords from inquiring about the immigration status of tenants or applicants. New laws in Washington declare it unprofessional conduct for bail bond agents to enforce civil immigration warrants, prohibit employers from using immigration status to threaten workers and let employees use paid sick leave to attend immigration proceedings for themselves or family members. Vermont last month repealed a state law that let law enforcement agencies enter into immigration enforcement agreements with federal authorities during state or national emergencies. They now need special permission from the governor to do so. As passed by the House, Maryland legislation also would have barred local governments from reaching immigration enforcement agreements with the federal government. That provision was removed in the Senate following pushback from some of the seven Maryland counties that currently have agreements. The final version, which took effect as law at the start of June, forbids public schools and libraries from granting federal immigration authorities access to nonpublic areas without a judicial warrant or 'exigent circumstances.' Maryland Del. Nicole Williams said residents' concerns about Trump's immigration policies prompted her to sponsor the legislation. 'We believe that diversity is our strength, and our role as elected officials is to make sure that all of the residents within our community — regardless of their background — feel safe and comfortable,' Williams said. Many new measures reinforce existing policies Though legislation advancing in Democratic states may shield against Trump's policies, 'I would say it's more so to send a message to immigrant communities to let them know that they are welcome,' said Juan Avilez, a policy associate at the American Immigration Council, a nonprofit advocacy group. In California, a law that took effect in 2018 already requires public schools to adopt policies 'limiting assistance with immigration enforcement to the fullest extent possible.' Some schools have readily applied the law. When DHS officers attempted a welfare check on migrant children at two Los Angeles elementary schools in April, they were denied access by both principals. Legislation passed by the state Senate would reinforce such policies by specifically requiring a judicial warrant for public schools to let immigration authorities into nonpublic areas, allow students to be questioned or disclose information about students and their families. 'Having ICE in our schools means that you'll have parents who will not want to send their kids to school at all,' Democratic state Sen. Scott Wiener said in support of the bill. But some Republicans said the measure was 'injecting partisan immigration policies' into schools. 'We have yet to see a case in California where we have scary people in masks entering schools and ripping children away,' said state Sen. Marie Alvarado-Gil. 'Let's stop these fear tactics that do us an injustice.' ___ Associated Press writers Susan Haigh, Trân Nguyễn, Jesse Bedayn, John O'Connor and Brian Witte contributed to this report. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
Yahoo
16 hours ago
- Yahoo
Audit criticizes Arkansas Board of Corrections' hiring of outside counsel in dispute with governor
Arkansas Board of Corrections member Lee Watson, right, answers questions from the Legislative Joint Auditing Committee on Friday, June 6, 2025. (Tess Vrbin/Arkansas Advocate) An Arkansas legislative committee filed a report Friday detailing a requested audit into the Board of Corrections' 2023 hiring of a Little Rock attorney, a move that raised concerns from lawmakers about the board's procurement practices. The nonpartisan Arkansas Legislative Audit began the probe a year ago at the request of the Legislative Joint Auditing Committee, which heard the report Friday and continued to express frustrations about attorney Abtin Mehdizadegan's contract with the prison board. Mehdizadegan has been representing the Board of Corrections in both its legal challenge against two 2023 state laws and Attorney General Tim Griffin's suit against the board for allegedly violating the Freedom of Information Act in Mehdizadegan's hiring. Griffin's office usually represents state agencies in legal cases, but Arkansas law allows special counsel to be appointed in disputes between the attorney general and constitutional officers. Board member Lee Watson, who was the panel's secretary at the time it began working with Mehdizadegan, reiterated this to the committee Friday. Watson said the circumstances surrounding the board's November 2023 dispute with Griffin, Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders and then-Corrections Secretary Joe Profiri required special action. The board and the executive branch officials clashed over who has ultimate authority over Arkansas' prison system, including the expansion of facilities. Lawmakers criticize Arkansas Board of Corrections members, attorney over altered contract 'Our governor and our secretary were moving forward with moving prisoners into overcrowded facilities,' Watson said. 'Based upon our collective experience, we believed that that would endanger the people in that facility and the general public nearby.' He repeated past statements to lawmakers that Profiri's and Sanders' actions justified hiring Mehdizadegan after an executive session at a brief meeting in December 2023. The Joint Performance Review Committee spent three April 2024 meetings discussing and questioning Mehdizadegan's hiring and contract, and the panel voted to recommend that the Arkansas Legislative Council not review the contract. The audit report found that Mehdizadegan was present and spoke at several Board of Corrections meetings, but this was not reflected in the meeting minutes. The report also took issue with the board signing 'engagement agreements' with Mehdizadegan 'without establishing how the Board would pay for these services, as the Board has no appropriation or funding.' The engagement agreements also did not include the contract length or cost. Mehdizadegan's relationship with the board began when Watson informally contacted him as the board's legal liaison, Watson previously told lawmakers, but auditors 'were unable to verify' his appointment as liaison until after Mehdizadegan's hiring. Additionally, Mehdizadegan has submitted invoices totaling $230,138 to the board for his legal work, but those invoices were unpaid as of Feb. 11, the report states. Auditors recommended in the report that the Board of Corrections make the following changes: Making all board business public Amending the board's bylaws to include liaison appointments in required public business Including all relevant details in proposed contracts Consulting with state procurement officials before procuring goods or services Making sure all information submitted to state procurement officials is 'complete and accurate' BOC special audit report Mehdizadegan wrote the board's 30-page response to the audit findings, recommending that auditors revise the report 'and find that the Board acted lawfully, reasonably and appropriately in its selection of special counsel.' Sen. Jonathan Dismang, R-Searcy, said he was 'disappointed' in the board's response. 'All I was looking for in response was, 'Hey, we were in uncharted territory, we didn't know what we were doing, and you know what? We should have followed the procurement process,'' he said. Mehdizadegan and Board of Corrections Chairman Benny Magness were present at Friday's committee meeting but did not face questions from lawmakers. Less than a week after being hired, Mehdizadegan filed the board's lawsuit against Sanders, Profiri and then-Secretary of State John Thurston, challenging the constitutionality of Act 185 and Act 659 of 2023. Act 185 requires the secretary of corrections to serve at the pleasure of the governor rather than the board, while Act 659 alters the reporting structure for the directors of the Division of Correction and Division of Community Correction, requiring them to serve at the pleasure of the secretary rather than the board. The board argued the laws violate Amendment 33 of the Arkansas Constitution, which protects the power of constitutional boards like the board of corrections from the executive or legislative branches of government. Pulaski County Circuit Judge Patricia James granted a preliminary injunction in January 2024, which Griffin appealed. Arkansas Supreme Court sends AG's FOIA lawsuit against prison board back to circuit court The Arkansas Supreme Court allowed the lawsuit to continue Thursday when it dismissed the state's motion to send the case back to the circuit court, order the preliminary injunction vacated and dismiss the case as moot. The high court also dismissed a motion to disqualify Mehdizadegan from further participation in proceedings before the court. Last month, the state Supreme Court reversed a lower court's dismissal of Griffin's suit against the board for allegedly violating the FOIA to hire outside counsel. Pulaski County Circuit Judge Tim Fox gave Griffin 30 days to work with the corrections board on an agreement with an outside attorney to represent it. Fox dismissed the case without prejudice in January 2024, ruling Griffin's office failed to make an effort to initiate the statutory procedure that allows special counsel to represent state officials and entities. Griffin moved to vacate the circuit court's order, arguing his office could not certify special counsel until the board asked for legal representation. The Supreme Court agreed and sent the case back to Fox. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
