|
September 15, 2009
Chief Alan Baker
Danbury Police Department
375 Main Street
Danbury, CT 06810
Dear Chief Baker:
On behalf of the American Civil Liberties Union of Connecticut, I am writing in response to your invitation for public comment on the proposed Memorandum of Agreement ("MOA") with Immigration and Customs Enforcement ("ICE") under the 287(g) Program. Our organization is deeply concerned about the implications for the minority and immigrant communities in Danbury if such an agreement were to be executed. Therefore we urge you to reject the MOA altogether.
It is our position that the Danbury Police Department's ("DPD") unlawfully discriminatory actions against members of Danbury's minority and immigrant communities in the past - along with an apparent refusal to acknowledge the wrongful actions that have been taken - provide sufficient reason for Danbury and ICE to reconsider their proposed joint venture.
As set forth in the pending complaint against the city of Danbury and the Department of Homeland Security (see attached), the immigrant community in Danbury has been the victim of abusive treatment and racial profiling long before the MOA was proposed. As alleged in one complaint, "Mayor Boughton and the DPD have also systematically targeted immigrant communities through numerous policies including discriminatory enforcement of city ordinances, such as housing code and vehicle registration regulations, shutting down neighborhood volleyball games, encouraging police harassment of day laborers, [and] encouraging direct police enforcement of civil immigration laws during motorist stops for moving violations." DACORIM v. DHS, Compl. ¶ 17; December 14, 2006. The well publicized incident involving ICE, the Danbury police and the arrest of eleven members of the immigrant community in Danbury highlights the severity of the problem. Thus far the Danbury police have shown no progress towards resolving the systemic civil rights infractions perpetrated against the immigrant community.
Under these circumstances, it should not be difficult to understand why our organization is so concerned about the prospect of giving the Danbury police 287(g) authority, an authority that can easily be used to engage in racial and ethnic profiling. It is impossible to prevent a police agency from misusing such power for improper purposes when the agency adamantly refuses to believe that the problem even exists, no matter how much evidence to the contrary is presented.
If the police authority to act under the MOA is permitted in this discriminatory context, the problem of racial and ethnic profiling will only get worse, based on the experience in other regions where the ICE has deputized local police. This problem of MOAs leading to an increase in racial and ethnic profiling was highlighted in recent testimony before Congress:
Available statistical data suggests that 287(g)-deputized officers are using race or Latino appearance to stop, question and arrest for immigration related offenses. Moreover, pending litigation, news reports and other reported evidence further suggest that 287(g) agreements are leading to racial profiling. The poor administration of the 287(g) program-which lacks internal controls and fails to provide adequate supervision and training-also enhances the risk of racial and ethnic profiling.
Testimony on 287(g) by the American Civil Liberties Union, March 4, 2009, U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Homeland Security (Testimony).
In light of the dubious track record of 287(g) programs and the resulting increased risk of racial and ethnic discrimination by the Danbury police department under such a program, we urge you to reject the proposed MOA.
Sincerely,
David McGuire
Staff Attorney
CC: William Riley, Acting Director
Office of State and Local Coordination
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
500 12th St. NW
Washington DC 20536
|
