Philadelphia, Baltimore, and the Majority of Counties in Oregon Limit Local Police Involvement in Enforcing Immigration Laws
The list of localities that have adopted ICE detainer policies that enhance public safety and build trust between immigrant communities and police continues to grow. On April 16, the Mayor of Philadelphia signed an Executive Order restricting when city police will detain individuals to hand over to ICE for immigration enforcement. Philadelphia’s policy has been called “one of the most progressive in the country .” It prevents police from honoring an immigration detainer request unless the individual has been convicted of a violent felony and ICE has obtained a judicial warrant based on probable cause. This policy comes on the heels of last month’s Third Circuit Court of Appeals decision , holding that ICE detainers are merely requests and state and local law enforcement are not required to honor them.
Under an April 18 policy, the Baltimore City Detention Center will only hold individuals for possible deportation by ICE when they have been charged with or convicted of a felony, three misdemeanors, or a “serious” misdemeanor. In announcing the change, Maryland’s Governor O’Malley stressed  the need to limit compliance with ICE detainers to cases where there is an actual public safety threat rather than separating families simply because Congress is unwilling to “reach a reasonable compromise on comprehensive immigration reform.”
Finally, 23 of Oregon’s 36 counties have ceased  honoring ICE detainers. These policies followed a federal court decision  finding that Clackamas County sheriffs violated the Fourth Amendment rights of an Oregon immigrant they continued to hold for 19 hours after her state charges were resolved and she was eligible for release. The federal court agreed that immigration detainers are only requests and the mere existence of a detainer did not constitute probable cause permitting the County to continue to detain this individual. This ruling clarified that honoring ICE detainers may result in constitutional violations. Fears of legal liability may spur other cities and counties to adopt detainer policies such as those recently announced in Oregon, Baltimore, and Philadelphia.
Click here  for a comprehensive list of the states and localities that to date have limited compliance with immigration detainers and here  for Talking Points on Why States Should Separate Local Policing From Immigration Enforcement.
Harboring Provision of Arizona’s SB 1070 Will Remain Blocked
On April 21, the U.S. Supreme Court declined  to hear the appeal brought by the state of Arizona in Arizona v. Valle del Sol, Inc. This case involved the provision of SB 1070 that would have made it a state crime to encourage unauthorized immigrants to enter Arizona or to harbor or transport them within the state. Both the district court and the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals had prevented the provision from going into effect after finding that it was preempted by the federal law against harboring (8 U.S.C. §1324). The Supreme Court’s refusal to intervene is a relief for the parishes, teachers, social workers, and others who work regularly with immigrant communities in Arizona and may provide shelter or rides to many of its estimated 400,000 undocumented residents.
Which Ten States Have the Largest Populations of Unauthorized Immigrants (According to DHS)?
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) recently released statistics on the estimated number of unauthorized immigrants residing in the United States as of January 2012. According to the report , the total number of undocumented individuals in the country was 11.4 million. DHS also published the following estimates for the 10 states with the highest numbers of undocumented residents:
- California (2,820,000)
- Texas (1,830,000)
- Florida (730,000)
- New York (580,000)
- Illinois (540,000)
- New Jersey (430,000)
- Georgia (400,000)
- North Carolina (360,000)
- Arizona (350,000)
- Washington (270,000)
Virginia Attorney General Extends In-State Tuition Eligibility to DACA Recipients
On April 29, the Attorney General of Virginia announced  that young Virginians who were brought to the U.S. as children and have been recognized under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program would no longer be treated as “international students” for college tuition purposes. Moving forward, these students may legally establish Virginia domicile and will be eligible for in-state tuition rates at Virginia’s public colleges and universities. State legislators in Virginia have introduced tuition equity bills for several years but such proposals have been unable to pass. Last year, a group of DACA recipients, who pay out-of-state tuition rates of 230% to 245% more than in-state rates at the Virginia community colleges, filed a lawsuit  against the State Council of Higher Education. The change in Virginia tuition policy is being celebrated by the student plaintiffs. According to the Legal Aid Justice Center , which represented them in the legal challenge, “we continue to fight on the federal level for a path to full citizenship for these Virginia students and their families.”
This document was prepared in April 2014 for informational purposes only and is not intended as legal advice. For questions, please contact CLINIC’s State & Local Advocacy Attorney Jen Riddle at firstname.lastname@example.org  or (301) 565-4807.