Hundreds of immigrants rights advocates in Los Angeles staged a walkout during a federal task force field hearing about the Secure Communities program, blamed for the deportations of tens of thousands of non-citizens living peacefully in America. Activists implored the members of the task force to resign their post, and recommend that the Obama Administration end Secure Communities, before exiting the meeting to a chant of “we don’t need a hearing, we need to end the program.”
First, some backstory on an issue that is roiling through Latino communities, but which has not received the same scrutiny elsewhere. Secure Communities (S-Comm) is a federal/local partnership that has local law enforcement send fingerprint information on individuals they arrest to federal immigration officials, who crosscheck them against their records. The Department of Homeland Security and Immigrations and Customs Enforcement claim that S-Comm is a valuable tool in the deportation of violent criminals. However, undocumented immigrants have been deported through S-Comm for trivial offenses like parking tickets, driving without a license, participating in protests or even merely reporting crimes to authorities. Estimates are that over half of the deportations from S-Comm are of undocumenteds with no convictions or misdemeanors. Marissa Graciosa, spokesperson for the Fair Immigration Reform Movement (FIRM), said in a statement that “As a result of Secure Communities, immigrants are afraid to report crimes committed against them for fear of being deported. The program creates a wedge between local law enforcement and people they are trying to protect.”
The program is up and running in 44 states, with the goal of all 50 states by 2013. Multiple states, including Illinois, New York and Massachusetts, have tried to opt out of the program, part of the Obama Administration’s deportation strategy, which has removed a record 400,000 immigrants a year from the country (approximately 11,774 have been removed from Los Angeles County through S-Comm). They would prefer not to have their local law enforcement officials turned into ICE agents. And community activists have demanded that the program be terminated.
However, the Administration has given conflicting signals on the program. First it made it a voluntary partnership, then pronounced that communities could not opt out. After signing memoranda of understanding with dozens of communities, DHS recently tore them up. Internal memos stressing prosecutorial discretion and highlighting the goal of unification of families are simply not being implemented at ICE satellite offices. Victor Nieblas, an immigration attorney who spoke at the hearing, decried a “lack of transparency and mass confusion” around S-Comm.
As part of an effort to increase transparency, DHS set up this federal task force, led by retired Sacramento Police chief Arturo Venegas Jr., which goes around the country collecting information and listening to communities ravaged by deportations. But there is tremendous skepticism that the task force is nothing but a sounding board that will then ignore the concerns of the communities at risk. “These hearings are only a guise to appease public outrage about the Secure Communities Program. Last week ICE terminated all Memoranda of Agreement with states, clearing the way for the program to continue to expand, despite many Governors’ and Mayors’ requests to opt out of the program,” said Graciosa of FIRM.
Activists packed the hearing room in historic Filipinotown in Los Angeles, wearing and carrying signs that said “Terminate Secure Communities,” “Stop Ripping Apart Families” and “No Legalizacion, No Reeleccion” (no legalization, no re-election). Nearly all of the comments were harshly critical of S-Comm, and many were in Spanish. In particular, undocumented students took to the microphone to tell their story. Rigoberto told of his life as an undocumented student with a citizen brother, who had his mother deported through S-Comm. “My brothers were taken by a social worker, sent to foster families, I couldn’t take custody of them,” he said. “This program is unjust and unfair, it keeps separating families.”
Lieblas, the immigration attorney, told a story about a client, a young girl who found a dead body one day after work. She alerted the authorities, and the district attorney subpoenaed her for testimony. After that she was sent to ICE. “Who will want to participate with the authorities” in such an environment, Lieblas queried the task force.
Multiple aides to state and local elected officials read statements. Assemblyman Tom Ammiano said that DHS misrepresented the program to electeds, and that the members of the task force should resign, and call to “end this fatally flawed program today.” An aide to Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa said that he supported reworking or eliminating the program, and noted that the LA City Council voted to opt out of S-Comm.
Finally, after about 90 minutes of testimony, Jonathan Perez, an “undocumented and unafraid” student from San Bernardino, who earlier told of his night in an ICE holding cell after an arrest, interrupted the task force by saying, “This task force is a farce, the community has spoken, they want you to resign and to end this program.” Then he asked everyone who agreed with him to walk out of the hearing, which they promptly did. Nearly the entire crowd exited the meeting room and spilled out onto the street.
Arturo Venegas Jr. of the task force said that “I always have an option of resigning” but that the task force “has the opportunity to make a recommendation.” He decided to continue to take testimony for the duration of the meeting from the few stragglers who remained.
Meanwhile, outside the hearing room, community activists rallied with chants, drums and speeches. Perez told the assembled, “We showed them that we’re tired of being criminalized. They continue to lie that people aren’t being deported from S-Comm. DHS has no intention of making reforms.”
Another undocumented student, Marisa Franco, said that this was not a struggle of immigrants, but of all people concerned with civil rights. She sneered at the task force’s effort to make it look like the federal government was listening to the concerns of the affected communities. This was the second hearing, with an earlier one in Dallas last week. “It’s like what Jay-Z said, on to the next one? They have no plans to listen to us, no plans to change this program. But it didn’t go down like that in LA, not like Dallas, we walked out.”
There are national protests scheduled by Presente.org and other immigrants rights groups in six cities tomorrow over S-Comm, including in front of the Obama 2012 Campaign Headquarters. Until you see the anger and frustration among young Latinos up close, you really have no idea about the magnitude of this issue in these communities. As Carlos Rea from Presente said in a statement, “There have been more deportations on President Obama’s watch than at any time in American history — If the President continues to alienate Latino voters he will lose the election, plain and simple.”
More on the hearing from the Associated Press.







38 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
Thanks for covering this story. I was furious when I learned that after all the effort that went into convincing our elected officials in MA to opt out, that the feds turned around and said no.
The DHS is out of control. Napolitano needs to resign and someone else needs to start winding down the agency. The United States is not supposed to be a police state. And yet, that is what DHS is turning us into.
It appears that everything coming out of Washington for the past 12 years causes mass confusion. Could they police themselves for a while instead of the population?
At the rate Latinos are self-deporting, we probably won’t need the alleged “Secure Communities” program much longer. Ain’t gonna be anything to secure. I know two families who have left the US for Mexico in the last couple of months. Both families were gainfully employed but still left even without jobs back in Mexico.
There are fewer undocumented immigrants in California – and the Sacramento region – because many are now finding the American dream south of the border.
What a way to get Hispanics a group that does not vote much enthused to vote for Obama its not like we don’t have a choice staying home on election day was always one of our choices but with a low Hispanic turnout how many states would flip from Blue to Purple or even Red?
Obama can yell at the Left all he wants for being irresponsible for not supporting him on election day but Hispanics are a much bigger group if he yells at them he makes the story bigger and further depresses the Hispanic vote while making no friends with Moderate and Righty voters.
Obama very well be our most racist President in decades.
And that’s great for Mexico. I’m not taking anything away from it becoming a middle class country, in fact, I hope it does.
Hispanic activists have held back on protests lately but even a few years ago they were having protests in the thousands protests that dwarfed Glen Beck’s Tea Bagger rallies in more cities than the Tea Bagger’s had protests in but even the Lake was not front paging that news never mind the MSM:(
The Tea Baggers with their press coverage became a national force we were ignored despite doing the work and getting a much bigger crowd.
But I guess a few hundred of us protesting is safe to mention now?
People are afraid to protest in public. Specifically because they would be identifying themselves as undocumented. Either that or there simply are not as many TO protest these days.
And it’s not just California…..plenty of other states either are or are becoming inhospitable places for undocumented immigrants.
http://my.firedoglake.com/thingscomeundone/2010/04/16/the-story-the-msm-missed-the-tea-bagger-movement-is-failing-protest-size-down-more-than-23-than-the-first-one/
If your arguing that in year under Obama things have gotten so bad for Hispanics they are now afraid to protest I can’t argue with that without much more research.
But I can say Hispanics, Immigrant Rights even a year ago were getting bigger crowds than the Tea Baggers but of course it helps that our marches were a bit more open to all races joining in than the Tea Baggers mostly Whites Only rallies were.
Many of them are afraid to protest and who wouldn’t be if by doing so, they identify themselves as undocumented? Plus, as indicated by the stats already provided by alan1tx, there are fewer of them TO protest. The trend of undocumented people leaving the US is several years old now, it’s not a new trend. That was my point about why the crowds are smaller these days. It’s nothing to do with the Tea Party and I make no comparisons. My point pertained strictly to the subject.
A march with hundreds gets covered but a 1/2 million march does not get covered by the MSM or even FDL’s front page when the Tea Baggers were getting covered by the MSM and FDL’s front page with multiple posts with only 268,00 – 311,460 people attending?
I am disappointed to say the least.
I agree on that point its sad our economy is so bad immigrants are going back to Mexico.
The point I’m making is that under Obama Hispanics might be afraid to protest like they were only a year ago.
Alan1tx is right future immigration rights protests should be smaller but from 1/2 million to a few hundred Nope not that small unless Hispanics are more afraid of Obama than they were of Bush.
The election implications of such fear should terrify Obama legal Hispanics have friends who are illegal are often stopped and asked for identification because they look illegal so how illegals are treated is our issue too.
If even 10% of us who voted for Obama last time stop voting for Obama can Obama hope to win California? Illinois?
While the weakened U.S. economy, rising deportations and tougher border enforcement have led to fewer undocumented migrants, changes in Mexico are playing a significant role, Sacramento’s Mexican consul general, Carlos González Gutiérrez said.
Mexico’s growing middle class “reduces the appetites to come because there are simply many more options” at home, González Gutiérrez said. “Most people who decided to migrate already have a job in Mexico and tend to be the most ambitious and attracted to the income gap between the U.S. and Mexico.”
Mexico’s economy is growing at 4 percent to 5 percent, benefiting from low inflation, exports and a strong banking system, the consul said.
A point I’ve already made several times. And it’s partly fear and partly numbers.
And you can’t blame people for moving to where things are better. After all, that’s why many Mexicans moved to the US to begin with, either things were at the time better here or they thought they were. If that’s no longer true, I would expect people to move again. Particularly since the US has become much more unfriendly to undocumenteds.
And while you mentioned the income gap, there’s also a huge cost of living gap. It is much cheaper to live in Mexico.
You especially can’t blame them when US policy and corporate monies are the reason that citizens of Mexico are willing to flee half way (or more) across the continent.
I don’t see much evidence that many are fleeing over corporate monies. It seems much simpler and more personal than that. Looks to me like it’s “Where can I get a job and where will I be least likely to be hassled?” For many, that comes up Mexico.
secure communities – the name says that undocumented people are a criminal element that make us unsafe.
Remember that book by Jeffery Goldberg called Liberal Fascism? Just give a program an orwellian name and let a “liberal” president enforce it, and he can do anything.
While that may indeed be the intent of the SCP, to leave the impression that undocumenteds make a community unsafe, it sppears that the folks deciding that their communities are unsafe are actually undocumenteds themselves. Pretty ironic, eh?
And not just Hispanics. If Perry is elected, you can expect yourself to be on a list if you go to a public protest. The facial recognition software is now good enough for that. Even back in the day, I remember the FBI photographing people marching against the Vietnam War. I saw one taking pictures once on the New Haven green (I wesn’t demonstrating) and had the temerity to ask the man what he thought he was doing. And then he took a picture of me.
There are very few people now who remember what it was like under McCarthy, when you had to sign a loyalty oath to keep your job or even get a publicly funded scholarship (I refused). They can ruin you in a New York minute, and if protests start mounting with the unemployment rate, it will happen.
It’s also why the American ex-pat population is growing. The US government is now trying to clamp down on the ex-pats. In a few years it will probably be impossible to secure a passport renewal from a foreign embassy. Americans are going to be trapped in their own country.
Especially retirees. They can live really well in many parts of central and south america. I know a number of US expats, including my own parents, and haven’t noticed any US government clamp down.
Somehow I doubt that Perry is going to put anyone on a list if they are observed at a Tea Party rally.
Our immigration and temporary worker system needs a complete and fair overhaul before instituting the draconian system of enforcing current insanities by ICE.
I can’t tell you FDLers how wonderful it is to come to this site, read a posting about Secure Communities, and then read a “Comments” section devoid of nasty, demeaning, dehumanizing, racist comments. Thank you! Additionally, virtually no use of the dreaded “i” word; Thanks again! You folks ROCK.
Exactly…the system is seriously broken. Enployers can exploit those who come in for a job; the family relationship provision has lines that are years out….The idea of amnesty make some anti-immigrant people go crazy. We need good & effective leadership to craft a sensible, workable program.
Be sure not to listen to Laura Ingraham; she refers to all immigrants as the “i”, and she was so insulting to young people who may have been eligible for the Dream Act. She is one hostile, mean person.
When the USA replaced the Bill of Rights with the Patriot Act even the rights of citizens, not to mention the undocumented, were abrogated. When the government can designate anyone as an enemy combatant and disregard habeas corpus we’re all subject to the whims of the MOTU. The domestic enforcers of the police state, the FBI, are more concerned with investigating and criminalizing anti-war activists than the thugs of Wall Street.
So, lemme see if I understand this:
The solution to illegal immigration isn’t a sea-to-sea fence (because that strikes at the image of American as a welcoming country), and the real answer is workplace enforcement.
But…
Workplace enforcement, which means (in addition to penalizing employers) deporting those here illegally is wrong because the people are already here.
And…
Deporting those here illegally. who got here illegally in part because there was no fence to hinder them from getting here, is also wrong because they are already here.
So the only logical conclusion is:
Anyone who wants to come here should be allowed to do so without exception. No visas, no passports, no guarantees of a job, no background checks, etc.
Okay. Got it.
BTW: What was that U6 unemployment figure? How many of our states are being crushed by demands for services that outpace revenues?
No, you didn’t “get this right”. Neither the author of this post, nor anyone commenting on this post has suggested that your “only logical conclusion” would be an appropriate policy. Most of the folks at FDL see shades of gray and policy nuance, and favor a humane policy of prosecutorial discretion, as announced by ICE Administrator Morton last month.
Some even see that the level of undocumented immigration (at least the flow through Mexico) has slowed, in response to the Obama Administration’s record of more than 1 million deportations and “silent raids” (I-9 business audits and Social Security “No-Match” letters).
http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/news/2011/08/08/mexico-says-immigration-outflow-almost-nothing/
http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/
Most reasonable people can agree that comprehensive immigration reform is long overdue, and that a properly structured program can be both humane and helpful to the U.S. economy.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-j-skorton/immigration-reform-the-ec_b_914973.html
http://nationaljournal.com/tech/progress-on-immigration-education-key-to-reviving-jobs-tech-leaders-say-20110802?mrefid=site_sea
If only we could get the recalcitrant and tea party patronizing Congress on board. The same folks who refuse to compromise on taxes also refuse to consider any immigration legislation that provides for anything other than lifetime banishment from the U.S. for individuals who are out of status,and are perfectly content to see the country go down the toilet rather than accepting anything less than 100% of what they demand.
http://www.juancole.com/2011/07/12832.html
http://ailaleadershipblog.org/2011/07/26/senate-judiciary-hearing-immigration-and-econom/
I saw a stat awhile back that said that the US allows more legal immigration per year than any other country in the world. But that’s not a humane policy?
And even the legal immigration is deeply flawed, as H1b visas are abused by companies as a way to keep down labor costs and discourage unionization, just as illegal immigration performs the same function for building trades, service workers, etc.
Many people incorrectly conflate immigration restrictions and strict border controls with racism. They somehow want to believe in magical thinking in which everyone who wants to participate in the American Dream can do so, that we have the unlimited resources for such to occur.
We decry the rapid onset of oligarchy in our country, yet refuse to admit that the problems in the economies of the countries from which our illegal come is also the result of oligarchical rule there. Mexico, for instance, is not a “poor” country. Last time I looked at the CIA World Factbook, Mexico was rated as the eleventh richest country in the world. Mexico and the other Latin American countries will get fixed only when the people of those countries rise up and do the fixing.
Got love that “prosecutorial discretion”. You know what that means? First, it means some people get treated better than others, which naturally pisses off those who get the shorter end of the stick. Then the immigration lawyers turn around and use the preferential treatment for some as justification for the same treatment for their clients. Then eventually, everybody who doesn’t have MS-13 tattoed on their forehead and multiple felony convictions gets to stay.
For the advocates of unlimited immigration, this is a win-win, can’t lose proposition.
The old H-1B canard again, huh. That some employers “game” the system is a perfectly acceptable reason for shutting down the program (even though NASDAQ studies show that U.S. technology companies expand their workforces by a factor of five U.S. workers for each H-1B worker they hire)? If that’s the case, let’s shut down our interstate highway system because some drivers exceed the speed limits and don’t get caught. The H-1B program requires that employers must pay the higher of either the “prevailing wage” (as determined by the US Dept. of Labor) or the “actual wage” for similar positions at the company, if that is higher. The USCIS has established, through increased filing fees, the FDNS fraud detection unit (in addition to ICE and all of the other enforcement agencies out there)whose mission is to prevent document fraud and to prevent immigration application/petition fraud. The FDNS makes “site visits” to companies filing H-1B and L-1 (Intracompany Transferee) petitions, as well as to religious organizations who file petitions for religious workers. Many of these visits take place even after approvals so that the sponsored workers are already on the jobs and their employment and pay records can be examined.H-1B employer sponsors are required to maintain “public access files” that would show the terms and conditions offered to H-1B beneficiaries, and critics of the H-1B program can and do take the opportunity to review these files, occasionally resulting in huge fines and debarrment from the H-1B program. Nothing wrong with enforcement, if done in a thoughtful manner, but anyone working with this broken system on a regular basis would never use the word “thoughful” as an adjective to describe the USCIS or its sister agencies.
Prosecutors across the country have and utilize prosecutorial discretion in deciding which cases to prosecute, given finite prosecutorial resources. While I may not always agree with the manner in which discretion is excercised, I appreciate that such discretion exists, as it should in any society that deems to call itself just.