AB 2792, as amended, Bonta. Local law enforcement agencies: federal immigration policy enforcement.
Existing federal law authorizes issuance of an immigration detainer that serves to advise another law enforcement agency that the federal department seeks custody of an alien presently in the custody of that agency, for the purpose of arresting and removing the alien. Existing federal law provides that the detainer is a request that the agency advise the department, prior to release of the alien, in order for the department to arrange to assume custody in situations when gaining immediate physical custody is either impracticable or impossible.
Existing law, commonly
begin delete knowend delete as the TRUST Act, prohibits a law enforcement official, as defined, from
detaining an individual on the basis of a United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement hold after that individual becomes eligible for release from custody, unless, at the time that the individual becomes eligible for release from custody, certain conditions are met, including, among other things, that the individual has been convicted of specified crimes. Existing law defines specified terms for purposes of these provisions.
begin delete billend delete would authorize a local law enforcement agency to participate in a begin delete federalend delete
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) immigration enforcement program only if it enters into a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the governing body of the political subdivision in which the law enforcement agency is located that describes the terms and conditions pursuant to which the agency will participate in the immigration enforcement program. The bill would authorize the MOU to take effect 30 days after ratification by the governing body, and would authorize the MOU to be valid for a period not exceeding 2 years. The bill would require the MOU and any records related to its development be public records for purposes of the California Public Records Act. The bill would require the local governing body to hold at least 3 community forums to provide information to the public about the policy under consideration, and to receive and consider public comment before entering into the MOU. The bill would require the MOU to require compliance with the TRUST Act, prohibit law enforcement
responses to ICE notification or transfer requests except in those situations in which a law enforcement official would have discretion to detain an individual, requiring compliance with local ordinances or policies that limits law enforcement responses to ICE notifications, or detainer or transfer requests, prohibit execution of an ICE detainer or transfer request and a plan to ensure that ICE does not have access to individuals protected from continued detention on the basis of an immigration hold. By requiring these local agencies to comply with these requirements this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.
The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.
This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
The California Constitution requires local agencies, for the purpose of ensuring public access to the meetings of public bodies and the writings of public officials and agencies, to comply with a statutory enactment that amends or enacts laws relating to public records or open meetings and contains findings demonstrating that the enactment furthers the constitutional requirements relating to this purpose.
This bill would make legislative findings to that effect.
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes. State-mandated local program: yes.
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
(a) Transparency and accountability are essential
5minimum requirements for any collaboration between state and
7(b) Recent immigration enforcement programs sponsored by
begin delete federalend delete Immigration and Customs Enforcement
begin delete agencyend delete
(ICE)have suffered from a lack of transparency
11(c) For example, a federal judge found that ICE “went out of
12[its] way to mislead the public about Secure Communities,” a
13deportation program in which ICE collaborated with local law
14enforcement agencies to identify people for deportation.
15(d) The Legislature further found that Secure Communities
16harmed community policing and shifted the burden of federal
17immigration enforcement onto local law enforcement agencies.
18(e) Although ICE has terminated the Secure Communities
19program, it continues to promote a number of similar programs,
20including the Priority Enforcement Program, the 287(g) Program,
21and the Criminal Alien Program.
22(f) The Priority Enforcement Program has many similarities to
23Secure Communities, including the checking of fingerprints for
24immigration purposes at the point of arrest; the continued use of
25immigration detainers, which have been found by the courts to
26pose constitutional concerns; and the reliance on local law
27enforcement to assist in immigration enforcement.
28(g) Just as with Secure Communities, numerous questions have
29been raised about whether ICE has been transparent and
30accountable with respect to its current deportation programs.
31(h) This bill seeks to address the lack of transparency and
32accountability by ensuring that all ICE deportation programs that
33depend on entanglement with local law enforcement agencies in
P4 1California are subject to meaningful public oversight and meet
2certain minimum standards.
Chapter 17.2 (commencing with Section 7283) is added
5to Division 7 of Title 1 of the Government Code, to read:
For purposes of this chapter, the following terms have
11the following meanings:
12(a) “Detainer request” means a federal Immigration and Customs
13Enforcement (ICE) request that a local law enforcement agency
14maintain custody of an individual currently in its custody beyond
15the time he or she would otherwise be eligible for release in order
16to facilitate transfer to ICE and includes, but is not limited to,
17Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Form I-247D.
18(b) “ICE immigration enforcement program” means any program
19through which the federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement
20(ICE) agency works with local law enforcement agencies to detect,
21detain, transfer, or share information about individuals who
22allegedly are noncitizens or who have committed civil immigration
23violations, or to station ICE agents in local jails, and includes, but
24is not limited to, the Priority Enforcement Program, the 287(g)
25Program, and the Criminal Alien Program.
26(c) “Local law enforcement agency” means any agency of a
27city, county, city and county, special district, or other political
28subdivision of the state that is authorized to enforce criminal
29statutes, regulations, or local ordinances; or to operate jails or to
30maintain custody of individuals in jails; or to operate juvenile
31detention facilities or to maintain custody of individuals in juvenile
33(d) “Notification request” means an Immigration and Customs
34Enforcement request that a local law enforcement agency inform
35ICE of the release date and time of an individual in its custody and
36includes, but is not limited to, DHS Form I-247N.
37(e) “Transfer request” means an Immigration and Customs
38Enforcement request that a local law enforcement agency facilitate
39the transfer of an individual in its custody to ICE, and includes,
40but is not limited to, DHS Form I-247X.
(a) A local law enforcement agency may participate
2in a federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)
3immigration enforcement program only if the law enforcement
4agency and the governing body of the political subdivision in which
5the law enforcement agency is located enter into a memorandum
6of understanding (MOU) that describes the terms and conditions
7pursuant to which the local law enforcement agency will participate
8in the immigration enforcement program. The MOU shall only
9take effect 30 days after ratification of the MOU by vote of the
10governing body of the political subdivision in which the law
11enforcement agency is located.
12(b) The MOU and any
records related to the development of
13the MOU, including, but not limited to, records of communication
14with ICE, shall be public records for purposes of the California
15Public Records Act (Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 6250)
16of Division 7 of Title 1).
17(c) An MOU enacted under this chapter shall be valid for a
18period not exceeding two years. Renewal of an MOU requires
19compliance with all of the provision of this chapter, including the
20public input process described in subdivision (d) and an evaluation
21of whether the conditions described in subdivision (e) have been
22fully implemented. An MOU may be renewed for a period not
23exceeding two years. An MOU may remain in effect for a period
begin delete ofend delete not exceeding six months following the two-year period if the
25renewal process began at least three months before expiration of
26the initial two-year period.
27(d) Before entering into an MOU, the local governing body shall
28hold at least three community forums that are open to the public
29on different days, in accessible locations, and with at least 30 days
30notice to the public to provide information to the public about the
31policy under consideration and to receive and consider public
32comment. The community forums shall be held pursuant to the
33Ralph M. Brown Act (Chapter 9 (commencing with Section 54950)
34of Part 1 of Division 2 of Title
begin delete 5.end delete
(a) An MOU entered into pursuant to this chapter shall
36include all of the following:
37(1) A provision requiring compliance with Sections 7282 and
387282.5, commonly known as the TRUST Act.
39(2) A prohibition on law enforcement responses to ICE
40notification or transfer requests except in those situations in which
P6 1a law enforcement official would have discretion to detain an
2individual on the basis of an immigration hold pursuant to Section
4(3) A provision requiring compliance with any local ordinance
5or policy that limits law enforcement responses to ICE
6notifications, or detainer or transfer requests.
7(4) A prohibition on executing an ICE detainer or transfer
8request that does not indicate, in writing, whether the request is
9supported by a judicial warrant.
10(5) A plan to ensure that ICE does not have access to an
11individual protected from continued detention under Section
127282.5, including, but not limited to, notification
begin delete of the presence individual in the custody of local law enforcement through
13of theend delete
15data sharing or otherwise, the ability to interview the individual,
16and access to
begin delete theend delete personal identifying
17information, including work or home addresses, of the individual.
18(b) Unless otherwise prohibited by a local ordinance, law
19enforcement policy, or an MOU entered into pursuant to this
20chapter, nothing in this chapter shall prohibit a local law
21enforcement agency from responding to an ICE notification or
22transfer request if a law enforcement official would have discretion
23to detain an individual on the basis of an immigration hold pursuant
24to Section 7282.5.
The Legislature finds and declares that Section 2 of
27this act, which adds Chapter 17.2 (commencing with Section 7283)
28to Division 7 of Title 1 of the Government Code, furthers, within
29the meaning of paragraph (7) of subdivision (b) of Section 3 of
30Article I of the California Constitution, the purposes of that
31constitutional section as it relates to the right of public access to
32the meetings of local public bodies or the writings of local public
33officials and local agencies. Pursuant to paragraph (7) of
34subdivision (b) of Section 3 of Article I of the California
35Constitution, the Legislature makes the following findings:
36By requiring public meetings relating to the manner in which
37local law enforcement entities cooperate with federal authorities
38in enforcing federal immigration laws and making related
39documents open to public inspection this act furthers the purposes
P7 1of paragraph (7) of subdivision (b) of Section 3 of Article I of the
No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to
5Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution because
6the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school
7district under this act would result from a legislative mandate that
8is within the scope of paragraph (7) of subdivision (b) of Section
93 of Article I of the California Constitution.