KAILUA-KONA — The Trump administration on Monday suspended weekly reports singling out “sanctuary cities” that don’t cooperate fully with immigration officials after several of the jurisdictions complained they’d been incorrectly included on the lists.
Spokespeople for both U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Department of Homeland Security said the suspension is temporary and was initiated to allow for a review of data collection and processing procedures with the aim of greater accuracy.
The reports also include the names of individuals released after jurisdictions ignored ICE detainers, as well as the crimes for which those people were arrested. Only three reports were issued before the suspension was announced.
“It’s very easy to make mistakes in those kind of name-and-shame lists,” said Clare Hanusz, an immigration attorney with Damon Key on Oahu.
Hanusz questioned the efficacy and purpose of the reports and also pointed to the bureaucratic overload necessary to compile them, which appears contradictory to the president’s push to limit federal agencies and their programs as well as associated costs.
“The reality is that the jurisdictions that are refusing to comply with ICE demands are also deeply grounded in their beliefs that they shouldn’t have to that I don’t really think it’s going to make any difference,” she said. “Just keeping up with all of the jurisdictions and all of the individuals who are purportedly involved would be full-time work for a number of people, and I don’t know if that’s the best way to spend agency resources.”
The administration, ICE and DHS disagree, citing the reports as a crucial impetus in a push toward transparency and public safety regarding undocumented immigrants residing in the United States.
The reports, which DHS began publishing in March, are part of administration efforts to pressure into compliance jurisdictions that have balked at more stringent federal immigration directives by ignoring detainers issued by ICE.
Detainers allow state and local jurisdictions to hold a person without a judicial warrant for up to 48 hours after they would normally be released on bail or because charges couldn’t be filed or were dismissed. The extended detention period, justified by an administrative warrant issued by ICE and not a judge, allow time for agents to initiate a transfer of custody and open up potential deportation proceedings as they deem fit.
Federal judges in Oregon, Illinois and Pennsylvania have ruled the controversial process unconstitutional, stating also that jurisdictions complying with such requests are potentially liable for damages.
Some jurisdictions included in the reports noted wariness over complying with detainer requests because of these rulings, which are clearly at odds with directives from the federal government.
Hawaii jurisdictions have yet to be affected by either the reports or the errors made in their compilation. Hawaii is one of seven states in the nation with a perfect track record of detainer compliance, according to research by The Pew Charitable Trusts, which also notes such requests made within the state are rare.
The state’s status with federal immigration entities may soon change, however, as the Legislature has adopted House Resolution 76, which asserts a policy urging counties to refrain from compliance with ICE detainer requests that do not involve violent crime and are not accompanied by a judicial warrant.
The policy also urges counties to avoid agreements that would allow for the deputization of local officers as immigration agents.
Nowhere in the resolution is the term “sanctuary” used. Still, Rep. Gene Ward, Hawaii Kai and Kalama Valley, told WHT last month that HR76 could open up the state to pushback from the Trump administration.
Potential retaliation might take the form of inclusion in future non-compliance reports or put Hawaii at risk of losing $1.5 billion in federal funding. Trump threatened to withhold most federal dollars from non-compliant jurisdictions in the same executive order that established the creation and publishing of non-compliance reports.
Rep. Joy San Buenaventura, Puna, who introduced the resolution said despite comments from Republicans like Ward, it is unfair to characterize the resolution as a measure aimed at turning Hawaii into a sanctuary state.
“I don’t think Hawaii should be put behind the 8-ball with the Trump administration punishing sanctuary states,” she said. “What (the measure) should be most closely linked with is an anti-commandeering resolution.”
States are protected under the 10th Amendment of the Constitution from commandeering by the federal government — a practice of coercing states through various means into the enforcement of federal law against their will and often at their own expense.
“We just want a policy to be put forth that we don’t want the counties to expend what little resources we have to enforce federal law when there is no warrant for arrest for a violent crime,” San Buenaventura said.
She added the timing of the resolution is “fortuitous” as it follows concern among Kona coffee farmers and their largely immigrant workforce over unconfirmed reports of recent ICE activity in the area.