In the Sept. 10 issue of the
Corpus Christi Caller-Times, appeared an article entitled "Immigration Enforcement Eased". I quote the article in full:
“New Mexico's most populous border county joined a national movement Tuesday prohibiting local officials from going out of their way to enforce federal immigration laws.
In a 5-0 vote, Dona Ana County commissioners approved a resolution to make the area a safe county and restrict county employees from asking residents about immigration status.
The move came after commissioners received a petition in February with 10,000 signatures and dozens of activists began attending board meetings.
The resolution, pushed by the advocacy group Border Network for Human Rights, calls for county departments and employees not to enforce federal immigration laws or use county resources for immigration purposes unless required by federal and state statutes.
However, commission chairman Billy Garrett cautioned that the measure didn't address comprehensive immigration reform or change the status of anyone who may be in the country illegally.
This is not about skirting the law, Garrett said. Dona Ana County Detention Center announced in June it would no longer honor requests by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to detain people for 48 hours while agents investigate their immigration status.
Until recently, it was common for ICE officials to ask counties to hold individuals brought in for traffic violations or other state or local infractions if the individual was suspected of not having proper immigration documents.
In April, a federal court ruled that a woman's constitutional rights were violated after Oregon authorities kept her beyond her release date so she could be transferred to immigration agents.
Since then, counties across the nation have passed measures similar to the one in Dona Ana County or withdrawn from the voluntary ICE program.
The American Civil Liberties Union of Iowa said last month, for example, that officials at 22 Iowa county jails have stopped accepting requests from federal immigration authorities to hold people in jail without a court order.
Rhode Island Gov. Lincoln Chafee said in July that the states Department of Corrections will no longer honor federal immigration detainers without a warrant.” (Caller-Times, page 3B)
In contrast: On Friday, Sept. 5, the
Texas Observer printed this article. I quote in part:
“Breaking News: Plans Underway to Build a New 2,400 Person Family Detention Center in South Texas"
Federal officials are planning a new for-profit family detention lockup for immigrant children and their parents in South Texas. The 2,400-bed “South Texas Family Detention Center”—as Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is referring to it—is slated for a 50-acre site just outside the town of Dilley, 70 miles southwest of San Antonio.
The detention center is part of the Obama administration’s response to the surge in children and families from Central America crossing the Texas-Mexico border. In a statement to the Observer, ICE spokeswoman Nina Pruneda said the facility was intended “to accommodate the influx of individuals arriving illegally on the Southwest border.”
The property is part of Sendero Ranch….owned by Koontz McCombs, a commercial real estate firm connected to San Antonio mogul Red McCombs. Loren Gulley, vice president for Koontz McCombs, said the company is still negotiating the deal but Corrections Corporation of America—the world’s largest for-private prison company—is expected to run the detention center….
Read the rest of the article:
http://www.texasobserver.org/exclusive-feds-planning-massive-family-detention-center-south-texas/
Questions for Personal Reflection:
Which parts of either article did you find yourself resisting? Resonating with? Why?
All of the persons involved in the 9-11 attack entered the US legally on non-immigrant visas. Are we focusing our efforts on the real criminals and the drug addicted? Why or why not?
Have you ever received a parking ticket or a speeding ticket or run a red light? Have you been called (literally) “an illegal” ever since? Why or why not?