BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 2792
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 27, 2016
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Lorena Gonzalez, Chair
AB
2792 (Bonta) - As Amended April 7, 2016
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Policy |Public Safety |Vote:|5 - 2 |
|Committee: | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: YesReimbursable:
No
SUMMARY:
This bill enacts the Transparent Review of Unjust Transfers and
Holds (TRUTH) Act, which requires a memorandum of understanding
(MOU), meeting specific criteria, between the governing body of
the appropriate political subdivision and Immigration and
Customs Enforcement (ICE) in order for a local law enforcement
agency to participate in an immigration enforcement program.
Specifically, this bill:
1)Authorizes a local law enforcement agency to participate in a
federal ICE immigration enforcement program only if it enters
AB 2792
Page 2
into a 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.
2)Requires the local governing body to hold at least three
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; and requires the
MOU and any records related to its development be a public
record for purposes of the California Public Records Act.
FISCAL EFFECT:
Unkown nonreimbursable costs to local agencies to comply with
the public forum requirements and request for public records if
the local law enforcement agency opts to participate in a
federal ICE immigration enforcement program.
COMMENTS:
1)Background. Current federal law authorizes the Secretary of
Homeland Security to enter into agreements that delegate
immigration powers to local police. The negotiated agreements
between ICE and the local police are documented in memorandum
of agreements (MOAs).
Current state law authorizes a law enforcement official to
cooperate with federal immigration officials by detaining an
individual on the basis of an immigration hold after that
individual becomes eligible for release from custody only if
the continued detention of the individual on the basis of the
AB 2792
Page 3
immigration hold would not violate any federal, state, or
local law, or any local policy, and only under specific felony
circumstances, or the individual is a registrant on the
California Sex and Arson Registry. However, if none of the
conditions listed is satisfied, an individual may not be
detained on the basis of an immigration hold after the
individual becomes eligible for release from custody.
2)Purpose. According to the author, "Immigrant communities form
an integral part of our state's social fabric. When
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) coerces local law
enforcement to carry out deportations, family members are
separated and community trust destroyed, and undocumented
witnesses and victims are afraid to step forward or seek help.
"In 2013, Governor Brown signed AB 4, the TRUST Act, which
protected community members from being detained by local law
enforcement under immigration holds requested by ICE. Prior to
the TRUST Act, ICE requested local jails hold community
members until they could be picked up for deportation. From
tamale vendors to domestic violence survivors transferred to
ICE for deportation, the holds caused significant suffering
and further weakened community-police relations as ICE sought
to have local police officers and sheriff's deputies help it
carry out mass deportation. After TRUST went into effect, a
federal court found all immigration holds unconstitutional,
but ICE has continued to circumvent the protections of TRUST
by requesting local law enforcement to notify them of personal
information, such as release time and location.
"With AB 2792, the Transparent Review of Unjust Transfers and
Holds (TRUTH) Act, we close that loophole and build upon the
TRUST Act. The TRUTH Act requires a transparent process,
including community engagement, prior to local law enforcement
participation in ICE deportation programs. Local law
enforcement must then reach an agreement with their city
AB 2792
Page 4
council or county supervisors, dictating the terms and
conditions of any participation in such programs, including
compliance with the state's TRUST Act.
"The TRUTH Act requires critical transparency from ICE,
ensures local communities have a voice, and creates clear
guidelines to guard against future abuses."
3)Support: According to The Mexican American Legal Defense and
Educational Fund, "The TRUTH Act also prevents separation of
immigrant families by requiring local governments to abide by
the protections of the TRUST Act for ICE notification
requests."
4)Opposition: The California State Sheriffs' Association
(CSSA), objects to the requirement of an MOU between the law
enforcement and its governing body if the law enforcement
agency intends to cooperate with federal authorities on issues
related to immigration. CSSA also objects to a process that
provides for a two-year limit on the MOU and subjects the MOU
to at least three different public forums.
5)Prior Legislation:
a) AB 4 (Ammiano), Chapter 570, Statutes of 2013, 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.
AB 2792
Page 5
b) AB 524 (Mullin), Chapter 572, Statutes of 2013, provides
that a threat to report the immigration status or suspected
immigration status of an individual or the individual's
family may induce fear sufficient to constitute extortion.
Analysis Prepared by:Pedro Reyes / APPR. / (916)
319-2081