Latest news with #LD1259
Yahoo
21-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Wells Police pauses ICE agreement in light of pending legislation that would ban it
Wells resident Beth Allen speaks in opposition to the Wells Police Department contract with ICE during a Select Board meeting on May 6. (By Emma Davis/ Maine Morning Star) The only Maine police department that has contracted with federal authorities to assist with immigration enforcement is pausing its agreement to see if the Maine Legislature votes to ban such contracts. Wells Police Chief Jo-Ann Putnam announced Tuesday night during a Select Board meeting that her department is adopting a 'wait-and-see approach' to credentialing its officers under U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's 287(g) program. 'This decision reflects the need to see how the legislation ends up playing out in Augusta,' Putnam said, referencing LD 1259, which had a public hearing on Monday. Two bills, LD 1259 and LD 1971, would prohibit state and local law enforcement agencies from carrying out the work of federal immigration authorities. LD 1259 would do so by explicitly prohibiting contracts with such authorities, while LD 1971 would place restrictions on enforcement activities absent formal agreements. Based on Putnam's brief comments at the meeting, it is unclear exactly what the pause means. Putnam could not be reached by the time of publication. In early May, she told Maine Morning Star that Wells officers had begun the training for the program, which is online. After the 287(g) program was discontinued in 2012 due to the discovery of discriminatory practices such as racial profiling, President Donald Trump revived it to bolster ICE's capacity by deputizing local police officers to detain immigrants, an authority otherwise generally reserved to federal authorities. Immigration enforcement hearing highlights lack of protocol for local, federal collaboration Putnam and Police Capt. Kevin Chabot previously told Maine Morning Star that they entered into the agreement to take advantage of a training opportunity and streamline work. On Tuesday night, Putnam said, 'I would like to reiterate one more time that at no point was there ever any intent on doing proactive immigration enforcement.' Wells remains the only local agency to have entered the program in Maine. Monmouth Winthrop Police Department, a combination of departments that serve central Maine communities, applied for the program but withdrew its application after community pushback. Community pushback in Wells is continuing in light of the pause. 'Our group, although appreciative of a pause, really is looking for Wells Police to withdraw from the contract,' Wells resident Peg Duddy told Maine Morning Star Wednesday morning. Duddy and other residents have been calling for termination of the agreement during Select Board meetings, including Tuesday night after Putnam announced the pause. The group has also been collecting signatures from Wells residents in favor of withdrawing and had more than 350 as of Wednesday morning, Duddy said. These residents have said they don't want their local force collaborating with an agency that has been accused of disregarding due process, for local police funding to go toward federal enforcement and possibly litigation, or for Wells to be known as an unwelcoming place for immigrants. However, other residents have commended local police for entering the federal partnership, showing that the matter has divided the community. The two bills heard on Monday come after Republican legislators presented a conflicting bill last month that would prevent local agencies from adopting any policies that restrict them from assisting in the enforcement of federal immigration law. None of these bills have received votes yet and there is only a month left until lawmakers are expected to conclude their work for the first year of Maine's two-year legislative session. One of the bill sponsors, Rep. Ambureen Rana (D-Bangor), told Maine Morning Star that the intention is for the Legislature to make its decisions on the issue this year. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
20-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Immigration enforcement hearing highlights lack of protocol for local, federal collaboration
Rep. Deqa Dhalac (D-South Portland) presents legislation to the Judiciary Committee on May 19 that would restrict the scope of immigration-related work of individual law enforcement officers and state employees. (Emma Davis/ Maine Morning Star) As some communities in Maine have clashed, with varying outcomes, over local police contracting with federal immigration authorities, legislators are pushing for new state laws that would make those decisions universal. On Monday, dozens of people packed the Maine Legislature's Judiciary Committee room, spilling into two overflow rooms, to testify largely in support of two bills proposed by Democrats that would restrict local authorities from carrying out federal immigration enforcement. For the most part, testimony for and against plans in Augusta mirrored the arguments that have been voiced in board meetings in a coastal community in Southern Maine. In April, the Wells Police Department became the first local agency in Maine to contract with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement under what's called the 287(g) program, which has divided the community. After the 287(g) program was discontinued in 2012 due to the discovery of discriminatory practices such as racial profiling, President Donald Trump revived it to bolster ICE's capacity by deputizing local police officers to detain immigrants, an authority otherwise generally reserved to federal authorities. Wells community divided over ICE agreement with local police Participation is growing across the country. As of Monday, ICE had signed 588 agreements with agencies in 40 states. Six states have laws or policies that prohibit participation, according to ICE. Wells remains the only local agency in the program in Maine. Monmouth Winthrop Police Department, a combination of departments that serve central Maine communities, applied for the program but withdrew its application after community pushback. While immigration is a federal matter by law, work on the local level is key. An estimated 70% of ICE arrests nationwide over the past decade have been handoffs from state or local authorities. The effect of both bills, LD 1259 and LD 1971, would be to prohibit state and local law enforcement agencies from carrying out the work of federal immigration authorities. LD 1259 would do so by explicitly prohibiting contracts with such authorities, while LD 1971 would place restrictions on enforcement activities absent such formal agreements, which is the case for the majority of police departments in Maine that currently have local discretion regarding when to involve federal officials. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX A fine point was placed on that subjectivity when Sen. Rachel Talbot Ross (D-Cumberland) questioned Kennebec County Sheriff Ken Mason, who testified against both bills on behalf of the Maine Sheriffs Association's Legislative Policy Committee, about general police protocols for when to involve federal agents, in light of a routine traffic stop in Waldo County leading to two immigration detentions. 'At what point in that dichotomy of events is the decision made to contact Border Patrol and why?' Talbot Ross asked. Mason responded, 'I have to rely on my deputies and the supervisors that are working the road that day to make a judgment call on if they believe they need to call somebody.' The text of LD 1259 is succinct. Sponsored by Rep. Ambureen Rana (D-Bangor), the legislation would prohibit state or local law enforcement agencies or officers from entering into contracts with federal immigration enforcement authorities. LD 1971, sponsored by Rep. Deqa Dhalac (D-South Portland), would restrict the scope of immigration-related work of individual law enforcement officers and state employees regardless of federal contracts. Specifically, LD 1971 would prohibit state and local law enforcement agencies from 'stopping, investigating, interrogating, arresting or detaining' a person for immigration enforcement purposes. This would include in response to a hold request, immigration detainer or administrative warrant issued by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. It would also prevent law enforcement from holding someone solely for immigration enforcement purposes for longer than 48 hours and establish clear protocols during custody, including requiring law enforcement to inform incarcerated people of their rights before an interview by an immigration authority. Home rule is wonderful until it comes to our constitutional rights, which our federal authorities are violating right now. – Ambureen Rana The bill specifies that it would not prohibit a law enforcement agency from arresting, detaining or performing other law enforcement duties due to reasons not solely based on the person's immigration status. Other than law enforcement, LD 1971 would prohibit state employees from inquiring into immigration status unless the inquiry is required by law or necessary to provide the service sought by the resident. Proponents say that allowing local police to carry out federal immigration enforcement would erode public trust and safety. Lisa Parisio, policy director at the Immigrant Legal Advocacy Project, Maine's only state-wide immigration legal services organization, said ILAP's clients have already reported that they've decided to not call the police when they wanted to out of fear for their own safety and that they are scared to continue serving as a witness in court. Some of their clients have also reported that they're not pursuing higher education out of fear of immigration enforcement, which Parisio described as a loss to Maine's future economy. Many who testified focused on cost. Proponents said the bills would protect local tax dollars from being strained to carry out federal responsibilities. Under 287(g) agreements, ICE is responsible for the cost of training and information technology infrastructure, however the local law enforcement agency bears all other costs, including personnel expenses such as salary and overtime, benefits and lawsuits, according to the general memorandum of understanding. Rep. Elizabeth Caruso (R-Caratunk) said she appreciated this local control argument but asked Rana, in that spirit, why not leave the decision of whether to contract with federal immigration authorities up to local communities? 'I believe that we shouldn't be tying the hands of our local law enforcement by allowing the federal government to pressure them into these agreements,' Rana responded. 'Home rule is wonderful until it comes to our constitutional rights, which our federal authorities are violating right now.' Many proponents also highlighted this latter point, that they do not want local police to be implicated with a federal agency that has been accused of disregarding due process. Immigration detention increase reveals expanded federal operations in Maine Auburn Police Chief Jason Moen, who testified against both bills on behalf of the Maine Chiefs of Police Association, said he reviewed information about the 287(g) program and decided against his department participating. However, he does not think the blanket ban on such agreements in Rana's bill is the right approach, nor the restrictions on cooperating with federal authorities for immigration matters in the other bill. 'It disrupts long standing partnerships among local, state and federal agencies and will prevent local law enforcement from exercising discretion in critical situations,' Moen said. Moen and Mason from the Maine Sheriffs Association were the only two people to testify against the bills on Monday. Other groups submitted testimony in opposition, including the Maine County Commissioners Association to LD 1259. The association's legislative policy committee co-chairs, Stephen Gordon and Jean-Marie Caterina, wrote that the legislation could put at risk federal funding that county jails receive to detain people accused of violating federal law. 'These funds help defray county jail operating costs, which is good for local property taxpayers who are asked to fund the great bulk of the cost of operating county jails,' they wrote. As Maine has seen an uptick in immigration detentions, some immigrants rights advocates have raised concern about the financial incentives prisons and jails have to assist with the Trump administration's goal of expanding space for immigration detention. The Democratic proposals come after Republicans presented a conflicting bill last month that would prevent local agencies from adopting any policies that restrict them from assisting in the enforcement of federal immigration law. None of these bills have received committee votes yet and there is only a month left until lawmakers are expected to conclude their work for the first year of Maine's two-year Legislative session. Rana told Maine Morning Star that the intention is for the Legislature to make its decisions on the topic this year. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
19-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Advocates urge Maine lawmakers to bar police cooperation with ICE
May 19—Immigrants rights advocates urged Maine lawmakers Monday to restrict the ability of police departments to work with federal immigration authorities. One proposal before the Legislature would prohibit agencies or officers from entering into contracts to partner with federal immigration authorities. A second would prohibit police from stopping, arresting or detaining a person solely for immigration enforcement reasons. The proposals come as the Department of Homeland Security is working to expand the number of partnership contracts with local law enforcement agencies nationwide in order to carry out the mass deportations President Donald Trump promised throughout his campaign. Wells is currently the only municipality in Maine participating in the 287(g) Program, according to an ICE database, and the southern Maine town has faced pushback for agreeing to help U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Lawmakers on Monday held a public hearing on LD 1259, from Rep. Ambureen Rana, D-Bangor, which would prevent state and local agencies from entering into 287(g) Program agreements like the one Wells has. "I am very concerned by the recent push to encourage local law enforcement agencies to enter into 287(g) with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)," Pamela Proulx-Curry, executive director of the Maine MultiCultural Center in Brewer, said in written testimony supporting LD 1259. "Such agreements make our communities more unsafe, not less." Six states — California, Connecticut, Illinois, New Jersey, Oregon and Washington — have laws or policies that prohibit such agreements, according to ICE. On the other hand, a number of states, such as Georgia and Florida, have passed or are considering legislation requiring law enforcement to seek out or enter into partnerships with ICE under the 287(g) program. Proulx-Curry said the program turns routine encounters with police into opportunities for deportation, creating fear among immigrants and making them less likely to contact police if they witness or are a victim of a crime. "When people don't trust police, they're less likely to report domestic violence, fraud or unsafe working conditions — issues that affect everyone in a community, not just immigrants," she wrote. The Greater Bangor Area Branch NAACP also submitted testimony in support of the bill, testifying that if state and local law enforcement coordinate with immigration authorities it would have a "chilling effect" on immigrant communities and could drain local resources. "As has been documented nationally and within Maine, ICE and (Customs and Border Protection) have been especially targeting communities of color in their actions," wrote branch President Athena Bryce. "This is a civil rights concern for all the people in Maine." The Maine County Commissioners Association, which represents county governments across the state, submitted testimony opposing the bill, saying public safety is a local issue and that local governments should have the flexibility to enter into agreements and partnerships they believe are best for their communities. The bill could also jeopardize federal funds that county jails receive for detaining individuals who are believed to have violated federal law, including immigration laws, according to written testimony from the commission. "If a local law enforcement agency is asked to engage in behavior that is not consistent with the law, whether related to immigration or some other activity, those local agencies already have in place the tools and responsibility to refuse such requests," wrote Stephen Gordon and Jean-Marie Caterina, co-chairs of the association's Legislative Policy Committee. "A blanket state law forbidding cooperation would be unwise, and unwarranted." Rana said the agreements are not needed for local law enforcement to be able to do their jobs or for immigration officials to do their jobs in Maine. She also said the agreements are detrimental to taxpayers. "The bottom line is, a 287(g) agreement requires that we are using our local taxpayer money to do the job of federal immigration enforcement," she said. "Our resources are already limited, both at the state level and at municipalities ... and we should be using our local taxpayer money to care for our residents." Michael Kebede, policy director at the American Civil Liberties Union of Maine, cited several examples of communities from other states that have had to raise property taxes or draw from rainy day funds to implement multi-million dollar 287(g) programs, in testimony Monday. But Ken Mason, sheriff of Kennebec County and chair of the Maine Sheriffs Association Legislative Policy Committee, said members of the sheriffs association are in unanimous opposition to LD 1259. "As sheriffs, we cannot and should not be forced to pick and choose which state and federal laws to enforce," Mason said. Asked about the financial impact, Mason said his agency and others around the state participate in a federal grant program called Operation Stonegarden that is focused on border security and that has been financially beneficial, helping them buy equipment and pay for additional work. He said he couldn't say for sure if that program would be affected by LD 1259. "It's not specific to immigration," he said. "It's just 'Do your regular thing.'" A second bill, LD 1971, from Rep. Deqa Dhalac, D-South Portland, would prohibit law enforcement from stopping, arresting or detaining a person solely for immigration enforcement reasons. It would also require inmates to be informed of their rights prior to being interviewed by immigration authorities, and it would prohibit law enforcement from determining an inmate's custody status based on their immigration status. "(This bill) ensures that local and state law enforcement agencies can focus on their primary mission, which is safeguarding our communities and upholding state law," Dhalac said. Rana said she sees the two bills as complementary. "I do believe the bills work hand-in-hand," she said. "They don't compete. I do believe they address different issues and need to be implemented hand-in-hand to offer the most protections in our state." Copy the Story Link
