
Park Board wary as Spokane city councilwoman eyes icing ICE out of city parks
May 15—Spokane City Councilwoman Lili Navarrete has introduced a law to prevent federal agents without arrest warrants within areas of city parks where groups are holding ticketed community events or other areas normally limited to park staff.
"We're specifically doing this ordinance for federal agents," Navarrete said Monday. "As we have seen, they have been going places without warrants, which is unlawful under the Constitution.
"Our intention for this ordinance is for communities that are immigrant, if they have events in parks, that they are deemed nonpublic so they can have their birthday parties, cultural events, in peace and not be harassed by federal agents."
The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution prevents unreasonable searches and seizures and prevents the warrantless intrusion of law enforcement into a private home, but its protections are more limited on public property.
Navarrete believes that officially designating a part of a park "nonpublic," even on a temporary basis, could grant the same constitutional protections to a birthday party in the park as to a backyard barbeque.
The ordinance largely mirrors a 2018 local law which allows the council to designate any city property nonpublic; however, the council largely does not have authority over city parks, due to provisions of the City Charter.
Under the ordinance, designating an area of a city park "nonpublic" would be at the discretion of the parks director, who serves at the pleasure of the mayor, or the Park Board, a largely independent legislative body with nearly sole authority to regulate city parks.
But the Park Board appears to oppose the proposal, board President Jennifer Ogden wrote in a May 8 email to the council, noting the pending parks bond that would be on ballots this November coupled with a school bond, collectively marketed as "Together Spokane."
"The Park Board is focused on improving parks for all of its citizens in its Together Spokane initiative, not on restrictions," Ogden wrote. "Moreover, Park staff is not comfortable being in a role of enforcement — in fact that is the purview of our Police Department."
Ogden stressed that her opposition did not indicate tacit approval of the recent change in immigration enforcement policy and practices.
"Let me say that as a human being, and I mentioned this to Councilmember Navarrete, I am appalled at what is happening to our immigrant community," Ogden wrote. "I believe many of my Park Board members are equally sympathetic to the good intentions Lili is demonstrating and I commend her heart in this.
"However, as Park Board President I must state in the strongest possible terms that this ordinance is not authorized or approved by the Park Board."
Councilman Michael Cathcart raised a number of legal and logistical concerns Monday when the ordinance was introduced.
While the law specifically calls out federal immigration agents, Cathcart questioned whether it was legal to prevent one type of law enforcement from entering a space without a warrant while not prohibiting other types, including park rangers.
And unlike a private residence, where law enforcement are physically blocked from seeing the inside without a warrant or permission to enter, Cathcart questioned whether "open-field doctrine" would make Navarrete's ordinance moot in an outdoor park area.
Cathcart warned that if there were major loopholes to the ordinance's protections, it could give people a false sense of security.
He also questioned the potential logistical challenges of enforcing the law.
"If it's a paid event, it makes sense to kind of restrict access, but let's say we have Hoopfest in the park and someone says it's nonpublic, do you now need a ticket?" he speculated in an interview. "And if not, who is actually in charge of the park?"
Navarrete stressed that the ordinance was an initial draft and encouraged further amendments.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Chicago Tribune
an hour ago
- Chicago Tribune
Family sues over US detention in what may be first challenge to courthouse arrests involving kids
A mother and her two young kids are fighting for their release from a Texas immigration detention center in what is believed to be the first lawsuit involving children challenging the Trump administration's policy on immigrant arrests at courthouses. The lawsuit filed Tuesday argues that the family's arrests after fleeing Honduras and entering the U.S. legally using a Biden-era appointment app violate their Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizure and their Fifth Amendment right to due process. 'The big picture is that the executive branch cannot seize people, arrest people, detain people indefinitely when they are complying with exactly what our government has required of them,' said Columbia Law School professor Elora Mukherjee, one of the lawyers representing the family. The Department of Homeland Security did not immediately respond to an email requesting comment. Starting in May, the country has seen large-scale arrests in which asylum-seekers appearing at routine court hearings have been arrested outside courtrooms as part of the White House's mass deportation effort. In many cases, a judge will grant a government lawyer's request to dismiss deportation proceedings and then U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers will arrest the person and place them on 'expedited removal,' a fast track to deportation. Mukherjee said this is the first lawsuit filed on behalf of children to challenge the ICE courthouse arrest policy. The government has until July 1 to respond. There have been other similar lawsuits, including in New York, where a federal judge ruled earlier this month that federal immigration authorities can't make civil arrests at the state's courthouses or arrest anyone going there for a proceeding. The Texas lawsuit was filed using initials for the children and 'Ms. Z' for the mother. Their identities have not been released because of concerns for their safety. For weeks in the Dilley Immigration Processing Center, the mother has watched her 6-year-old son's health decline, Mukherjee said. He recently underwent chemotherapy treatment for leukemia and because of his arrest missed his check-in doctor's appointment, Mukherjee said. 'He's easily bruising. He has bone pain. He looks pale,' Mukherjee said, adding that he has also lost his appetite. 'His mom is terrified that these are symptoms that his leukemia situation might be deteriorating.' The mother, son and 9-year-old daughter fled Honduras in October 2024 due to death threats, according to the lawsuit. They entered the U.S. using the CBP One app and were paroled into the country by the Department of Homeland Security, which determined they didn't pose a danger to the community, Mukherjee said. They were told to appear at a Los Angeles immigration court May 29. President Donald Trump ended CBP One for new entrants on his first day in office after more than 900,000 people had been allowed in the country using the app since it was expanded to include migrants in January 2023. During the family's hearing, the mother tried to tell the judge that they wished to continue their cases for asylum, Mukherjee said. Homeland Security moved to dismiss their cases, and the judge immediately granted that motion. When they stepped out of the courtroom, they found men in civilian clothing believed to be ICE agents who arrested the family, Mukherjee said. They spent about 11 hours at an immigrant processing center in Los Angeles and were each only given an apple, a small packet of cookies, a juice box and water. At one point, an officer near the boy lifted his shirt, revealing his gun. The boy urinated on himself and was left in wet clothing until the next morning, Mukherjee said. They were later taken to the processing center, where they have been held ever since. 'The family is suffering in this immigration detention center,' she said. 'The kids are crying every night. They're praying to God for their release from this detention center.' Their lawyers have filed an appeal of the immigration judge's May decision, but they're at risk of being deported within days because the government says they are subjected to expedited removal, Mukherjee said. The arrests of the family were illegal and unjustified, said Kate Gibson Kumar, an attorney for the Texas Civil Rights project who is also representing the family. 'The essential question in our case is, when you have these families who are doing everything right, especially with young children, should there be some protection there?' Gibson Kumar said. 'We say 'yes.''
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Diego Luna's final 'Kimmel' monologue hits it out of the park
Diego Luna has had an excellent week. The Mexican actor and Andor star has finished up a guest-hosting spot for Jimmy Kimmel Live!, having delivered powerful monologues about Donald Trump's harsh immigration enforcement policies and sitting down for compelling interviews with icons such as civil rights activist Dolores Huerta. While receiving press praise and enthusiastic online comments, Luna has also faced hateful comments and criticism from the likes of Fox News — and he read out these posts and headlines on the show. On Thursday, for his final round, Luna brought it home by opening the show with mariachi music, giving Kimmel co-host Guillermo an executive producer promotion ("I don't know if I can do that, but I just did,"), and delivering a final must-watch monologue appealing to the audience for unity, not division. "I know there is a lot of focus in your media about the differences between our cultures and the violence south of the border, but I hope this week I was able to open up the dialogue. We should be doing more of that, telling our stories and finding what connects us," says Luna in the clip above. "We shouldn't let our cultural exchange be divided by borders, by ignorance, by fear, or a wall built by your president (that he paid for, by the way). We're going through a hard time. Authoritarian leaders and expressions are on the rise, and it's happening everywhere. Leaders who attack the press, use the military against their own citizens, and claim they have the answer to everything. Does that sound familiar? "But it's in our hands to do something. There are many ways to push back. And one way is by making fun of them every night like Jimmy does. Using comedy to defend freedom, they don't like that shit. And we can't take that for granted, because we, the audience, have to defend spaces like this. Without satire and voices like Jimmy's that question and challenge the abuse of power, democracy doesn't just weaken, it can disappear. And we cannot let that happen." Now, go and watch Luna's opening monologue if you missed it.


New York Times
2 hours ago
- New York Times
Newsom Sues Fox News for Saying He Lied About Call With Trump
Gov. Gavin Newsom of California sued Fox News on Friday, accusing the network of defaming him in its coverage of a phone call he had with President Trump this month. The suit, filed in Delaware, where Fox News is incorporated, seeks damages of at least $787 million and a court order prohibiting Fox from broadcasting or posting segments that mistakenly say Mr. Newsom lied about his call with Mr. Trump. Mr. Newsom has adopted an increasingly combative approach with the president since Mr. Trump sent military troops to Los Angeles this month amid his administration's immigration crackdown. The governor, a Democrat, is taking a page from the president by suing a news media outlet over coverage. Mr. Newsom's lawyers also sent Fox News a letter demanding a formal retraction and an on-air apology from Jesse Watters, a host who said on his show that Mr. Newsom had lied about the call with the president. If those conditions are met, the letter states, Mr. Newsom will dismiss the lawsuit. The punitive damages sought by Mr. Newsom mirror the amount that Fox News agreed to pay in 2023 to settle a lawsuit by Dominion Voting Systems that accused the network of publicizing false election conspiracies that damaged the company. 'If Fox News wants to lie to the American people on Donald Trump's behalf, it should face consequences — just like it did in the Dominion case,' Mr. Newsom said in a statement. 'I believe the American people should be able to trust the information they receive from a major news outlet.' Want all of The Times? Subscribe.