The American Civil Liberties Union of Wisconsin has filed open records requests to discover the extent to which the 72 sheriff’s departments in Wisconsin are working with Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Given clear indications that the Trump Administration seeks to encourage, if not compel, local jurisdictions to directly support federal immigration enforcement--as well as similar efforts by the Wisconsin Legislature--the ACLU of Wisconsin is writing to the sheriff in each Wisconsin county to inform them of their potential risks and legal liability associated with involvement in federal immigration enforcement.

“President Trump’s attempt to draft local law enforcement agencies into his immigration force is a terrible idea. It makes everyone less safe, by making immigrants fear any contact with the police, even if they want to report an accident or crime,” said Chris Ott, executive director of the ACLU of Wisconsin. “We have written these letters to make sure that sheriffs across the state understand that getting involved with immigration enforcement can expose them to lawsuits.”

In Milwaukee County, the ACLU of Wisconsin is also asking Sheriff David Clarke to disclose his interactions with federal immigration officials concerning possible participation in the 287(g) program, which bestows authority on local deputies to act as immigration enforcers. Milwaukee County recently disclosed an estimated cost of close to $1 million as a result of Sheriff Clarke’s detention of immigrants on requests from ICE.

Because local law enforcement is often not very transparent regarding when and how they cooperate with ICE, the ACLU of Wisconsin also included an open records request with its letters asking local sheriffs to provide their policies for working with immigration authorities and to report how many immigrants were detained in county jails and for how long.

A sample request can be found below.

Involving local law enforcement in immigration enforcement has proven counter-productive for community safety across the country. In cities such as Houston and Los Angeles, for example, police estimate that greater fear of deportation has driven double-digit declines in the reporting by Latino residents of crimes.

Date

Thursday, July 13, 2017 - 4:45pm

Featured image

Immigration and Customs Enforcement

Show featured image

Hide banner image

Tweet Text

[node:title]

Related issues

Immigrants' Rights/Derechos de los Inmigrantes

Documents

Show related content

Menu parent dynamic listing

22

Style

Standard with sidebar

The ACLU of Wisconsin sent the following letter to Mayor Tom Barrett on June 30, 2017 about changes to the Milwaukee Police Department policy on requesting individuals immigration status:

Dear Mayor Barrett:

We are writing you about changes the Milwaukee Police Department is planning to make to its standard operating procedure for interactions with the immigrant community in our City. The current policy was developed with input from the community, the ACLU and others, and represented a balanced approach. Under the current policy the police do not become agents for the enforcement of federal immigration laws, immigrants can feel safe interacting with the police as victims or witnesses, and serious crimes are dealt with appropriately.

Now, apparently in response to the threats and rhetoric coming out of the Trump administration, the MPD has decided to cave in to the federal government in pursuit of federal dollars and to gut much of this important policy without any community input. Perhaps most concerning, the proposed policy no longer prohibits an individual officer from inquiring about someone’s immigration status in routine interactions with the community, so long as the officer says he or she did not have the subjective intent to dissuade someone from filing a complaint or reporting a crime.

There is reason to believe that the existing policy does not violate 8 U.S.C. §1373, the federal statute that the Trump administration brandishes to threaten federal funding of cities. Nowhere does the current policy forbid a police officer from communicating information about a person’s citizenship or immigration status to ICE. Section 1373 does not require any local law enforcement agency to gather such information, nor does it require local governments to permit other types of information to be transmitted to the federal government.

If the City Attorneys office believes a change to the policy is necessary, we believe that the proposed revisions submitted by LULAC are an appropriate response that both protects immigrant communities and clarifies MPD’s compliance with federal law.

Therefore, we urge the City to reject the changes to the standard operating procedure of the MPD for dealing with the immigrant community. Instead, we encourage the City and the MPD to engage in broader outreach to the immigrant community to make it clear that their interactions with their local police department will not result in ICE knocking on their doors.

Sincerely,

Laurence J. Dupuis Legal Director

 

The ACLU of Wisconsin sent the following letter to Mayor Tom Barrett on June 30, 2017 about changes to the Milwaukee Police Department policy on requesting individuals immigration status:

Date

Tuesday, July 4, 2017 - 4:45pm

Featured image

Immigration and Customs Enforcement

Show featured image

Hide banner image

Tweet Text

[node:title]

Related issues

Immigrants' Rights/Derechos de los Inmigrantes

Show related content

Menu parent dynamic listing

22

Style

Standard with sidebar

The Fight for Every American’s Vote to be Counted Continues.

By Amrit Chenyg, Communications Strategist, ACLU

Attorneys from the American Civil Liberties Union first met Ruthelle Frank in 2011, when the then-84-year-old was fed up with her home state of Wisconsin’s attempts to infringe upon her right to vote. This month, we received the sad news that Ruthelle had passed away at the age of 89.

Ruthelle cared deeply about community participation and leading by example. In fact, for 18 years she served as an elected trustee of the Village of Brokaw, Wisconsin, where she was born and would live her entire life. She was fond of saying “If you don't use it, you lose it,” and this rang especially true when it came to voting. Ruthelle voted in every election since 1948, the year in which President Truman signed the Marshall Plan and the minimum wage stood at just 40 cents.

But in 2011, Wisconsin enacted one of the harshest voter ID laws in the country. Ruthelle’s longstanding participation in America’s democracy was suddenly at stake.

The truth is that we can safeguard our elections and protect people’s right to vote, but Wisconsin’s law does neither.

Wisconsin’s law not only mandated a photo ID to vote, but it limited that ID to a few official kinds and mandated that residents had to go to the DMV for their “free” IDs. Many Wisconsinites — including hundreds of thousands of registered voters — did not have these official state IDs. And Wisconsin did not make it easy to obtain them.

For Ruthelle, the battle with state bureaucracy began when the DMV told her she needed a birth certificate to get the “free” ID. Ruthelle was born in her home in 1927, and she had never even seen her birth certificate. The state refused to accept her baptismal certificate, social security card, or marriage license as alternatives.

Ruthelle tried to get a birth certificate — which cost $20 — but officials told her that her maiden name was misspelled in state records. In order to correct the misspelling, Ruthelle would need to go through a legal proceeding that could cost combined fees upwards of $200. Even then, Ruthelle didn’t know if this would be the end of it.

More importantly, Ruthelle deeply disagreed with the principle of a state forcing a citizen to pay to participate in American democracy. Knowing it was a step in the wrong direction for her state, Ruthelle decided to fight back and become the lead plaintiff in our lawsuit against Wisconsin’s voter ID law.

Ruthelle was part of the long battle to keep Wisconsin from infringing on the voting rights of so many across the state. In December 2011, we filed our lawsuit challenging the law. In a major victory in 2014, a federal district court ruled that Wisconsin’s voter ID law was unconstitutional and struck it down entirely.

In September 2014, however, a setback occurred. The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals reversed that ruling and tried to put the law into effect immediately. Fortunately, we succeeded in convincing the U.S. Supreme Court to block the law from taking effect in the November 2014 midterm elections.

Even though the law then went into effect, our lawsuit — Ruthelle’s lawsuit — continued. Among other problems, we called attention to the fact that Wisconsin did not include Veterans’ Administration ID cards or 2-year technical college ID cards as among the forms of acceptable ID for voting. The state eventually backed off and agreed to accept these forms of IDs, but it took years of litigation to get there.

And in another victory, the district court in our case ruled in 2016 that voters who have trouble obtaining identification in Wisconsin can vote by affidavit. Unfortunately, Wisconsin appealed that decision to the court of appeals, and while it is pending, the court blocked the affidavit option.

Throughout every legal twist and turn, Ruthelle remained committed to the fight. Everyone has a stake in ensuring that our elections are honest, fair, and accessible. Ruthelle knew this, and she did her very best to fight back against misguided laws which confuse restricted access for a more secure process. The truth is that we can safeguard our elections and protect people’s right to vote, but Wisconsin’s law does neither.

By sharing her story, Ruthelle had an incredible impact on both our work and the people around her, including many who did not personally know her. Among the memories shared online in the guestbook of Ruthelle’s obituary was, “I did not personally know Ruthelle Frank but knew of her by newspaper accounts about her determination to vote. She is an example to us all especially those who sit out elections. Thank you, Ruthelle, for being a great patriot.”

Ruthelle did not seek any sort of special treatment. She simply wanted everyone to have the right to vote. We at the ACLU thank Ruthelle for fighting alongside us and for setting a true example of what it means to participate in our democracy.

Date

Monday, June 26, 2017 - 4:30pm

Featured image

Ruthelle Frank

Show featured image

Hide banner image

Tweet Text

[node:title]

Related issues

Voting Rights

Show related content

Menu parent dynamic listing

22

Style

Standard with sidebar

Pages

Subscribe to ACLU of Wisconsin RSS