“The only place you find success before work is in the dictionary.”
PROTECT OUR CITY

Migrant law ballot language OK’d

Monica Alonzo-Dunsmoor
The Arizona Republic
Jul. 29, 2006 12:00 AM

City officials this week approved the ballot language for a proposed initiative that asks voters whether they want city officials, including police officers, to enforce federal immigration laws.

The measure has not yet been certified to appear on the November ballot, but the City Council had to meet a Wednesday deadline to submit the ballot information to the county.

“It doesn’t mean it’s a final thing,” City Clerk Mario Paniagua said. His office has until Thursday to verify if there are at least 14,844 valid signatures in support of the initiative.

Randy Pullen, leading a group called Protect our City, submitted more than 21,000 signatures for the measure. Pullen, who twice ran unsuccessfully for mayor of Phoenix, was also the main proponent of Proposition 200. That voter-approved measure aims to restrict certain public benefits to undocumented immigrants and keep them from voting.

If the proposal qualifies for the ballot, voters will consider a proposition that:

� Would “require all officials, agencies, and personnel of the city of Phoenix, including the Phoenix Police Department, to cooperate with and assist federal immigration authorities in enforcing immigration laws within the boundaries of the city.”

� States that “no official, personnel or agent of the city . . . will be prohibited or in any way restricted from sending, receiving, or maintaining information regarding the immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of any individual, or exchanging such information with any other federal, state or local government entity.”

� Would require Phoenix to “enter into an agreement with the United States Department of Homeland Security to designate police officers as immigration officers qualified to investigate, apprehend, and detain aliens in the United States.”

City officials say that such changes to city laws would hamper police officers from their daily duties.

“They say they just don’t have any police officers to spare to deal with illegal immigration,” Pullen said. “But the mayor has said they’ve found 186 police officers to work on those serial-killer cases without impacting normal police operations. It seems like when they need to find officers, they can find them. But when it doesn’t fit their political reasons, they can’t find them.”

Mayor Phil Gordon believes that Pullen is the one playing politics.
###

Published: 07.28.2006
Enforce immigration laws? ballot may ask
The Associated Press

Phoenix officials have approved the ballot language for a proposed initiative that asks voters whether they want city officials, including police officers, to enforce federal immigration laws.

The measure has not yet been certified to appear on the November ballot, but the City Council had to meet a Wednesday deadline to submit the ballot information to the county.

Randy Pullen, leading a group called Protect our City, submitted more than 21,000 signatures for the measure. Pullen was also the main proponent of Proposition 200. That voter-approved measure aims to restrict certain public benefits to illegal immigrants.

If the proposal qualifies for the ballot, voters will consider a proposition that:

Would “require all officials, agencies, and personnel of the city of Phoenix, including the Phoenix Police Department, to cooperate with and assist federal immigration authorities in enforcing immigration laws within the boundaries of the city.”
###

Immigration initiative submitted
Prop. 200 backer seeks to change Phoenix policies

Monica Alonzo-Dunsmoor
The Arizona Republic
Jul. 12, 2006 12:00 AM

The man who helped bring Proposition 200 to Arizona is pushing to change immigration policies in Phoenix.

Randy Pullen, leading a group called Protect our City, on Thursday submitted more than 21,000 signatures to get an initiative on a city ballot that would require Phoenix officials to enforce immigration laws.

Pullen needs 14,844 valid signatures to get his proposal in front of Phoenix voters as early as November 2007.

“This is Prop. 200 on steroids for Phoenix,” said Pullen, who spent about $50,000 to gather the signatures. Proposition 200 is a voter-approved measure that aims to restrict certain public benefits to undocumented immigrants and prevent them from voting.

Pullen’s latest initiative would require Phoenix to “enter into an agreement with the United States Department of Homeland Security to designate police officers as immigration officers qualified to investigate, apprehend, and detain aliens in the United States.”

Pullen said his next stop is Tucson, where he plans to duplicate his initiative after the Phoenix election.

Mayor Phil Gordon said he understands the frustration.

“People are frustrated. I understand that. I’m frustrated,” Gordon said. “Until Washington secures the borders and ports of this country, city initiatives with names like ‘Protect Our City’ only make us feel good but for no good reason. This won’t secure our borders.”

Pullen said he is expecting legal challenges from civil rights groups, such as the American Civil Liberties Union or the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund.

“They know if it gets on the ballot it will pass easily without me spending a penny on it,” Pullen said.

Danny Ortega, a Phoenix attorney who served as co-counsel on a MALDEF challenge of Proposition 200, said he would ask the organization to review Pullen’s initiative.

“It’s explosive and dangerous,” Ortega said. “It’s an initiative that will endanger the safety of every resident of Phoenix . . . (because) resources that would go into fighting dangerous crimes would be also used to apprehend and process alleged undocumented persons.”

Sgt. Joel Tranter, a Phoenix police spokesman, said the extra responsibility would put a strain on police officers who are already “extremely busy dealing with local issues.”

Pullen said that reasoning was “laughable” because a “large part of the crime is due to illegal aliens.”

Ortega said such statements weren’t factual and only served as a “political ploy to anger people into action.”

Pullen said it wasn’t about roundups but simply detaining and reporting “illegal aliens” police officers encounter during normal police work.

He said his initiative would end the Phoenix Police Department’s “sanctuary policy.”

“That policy tells police not to fulfill their oath, which is to enforce local, state and federal laws,” Pullen said.

The city’s mutual aid and jurisdiction policy outlines how police officers handle encounters with undocumented individuals. It instructs them not to arrest a person if his only violation is of a federal immigration law and not to notify immigration officials when an undocumented person is a victim or witness of a crime, has only committed a minor traffic offense or is seeking medical treatment.

Immigration officials are called in when police come across a house or vehicle being used in the smuggling of undocumented people or in a drug house, according to the policy.

Gordon said that making changes would be up to Phoenix voters. “And whatever they tell us, this mayor will be listening and carrying out their wishes.”
###

Pullen’s ‘facts’ look scary, but they’re wrong
Jul. 12, 2006 12:00 AM

The facts don’t help make the case. So why not just use anecdotal impressions to drum up fear?

That’s what Randy Pullen is doing to gain support for changing the city charter to force Phoenix Police to become immigration officers.

Police are concerned that the misnamed “Save Our City” plan would make them abandon crime fighting in order to constantly shuttle undocumented people to jail.

Pullen called that concern “laughable” because a “large part” of crime was caused by those immigrants.

But Pullen has no statistics to back up that assertion. And the statistics that are available suggest the opposite of what he claims.

According to numbers released by the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office, and reported by the East Valley Tribune last year, only 19 percent of the more than 10,000 people booked into jail during a typical month were non-citizens.

Not all of those are here illegally, although immigration authorities estimate that the overwhelming majority of them are.

Taking the legal non-citizens into account might bring that number of unauthorized people down to about 15 percent.

Either way, it doesn’t come close to representing a “large part” of the crime taking place in the Phoenix area.

Pullen has a history of playing fast and loose with facts.

When he ran for mayor, he made a wild claim about police officers being shot and killed by undocumented immigrants.

It was simply not factual.

Pullen understands the word “illegal” but has trouble with the word “truth.”

Reach Ruelas at (602) 444-8473 or [email protected].

###
Initiative would require migrant-law enforcement
Monica Alonzo-Dunsmoor
The Arizona Republic
Jul. 7, 2006

PHOENIX – The man who helped bring Proposition 200 to Arizona is pushing to change immigration policies in Phoenix.

Randy Pullen, leading a group called Protect our City, on Thursday submitted more than 21,000 signatures to get an initiative on a city ballot that would require Phoenix officials to enforce immigration laws.

Pullen needs 14,844 valid signatures to get his proposal in front of Phoenix voters as early as November 2007.

“This is Prop. 200 on steroids for Phoenix,” said Pullen, who spent about $50,000 to gather the signatures. Proposition 200 is a voter-approved measure that aims to restrict certain public benefits to undocumented immigrants and prevent them from voting.

Pullen’s latest initiative would require Phoenix to “enter into an agreement with the United States Department of Homeland Security to designate police officers as immigration officers qualified to investigate, apprehend, and detain aliens in the United States.”

Pullen said his next stop is Tucson, where he plans to duplicate his initiative after the Phoenix election.

Mayor Phil Gordon said he understands the frustration.

“People are frustrated. I understand that. I’m frustrated,” Gordon said. “Until Washington secures the borders and ports of this country, city initiatives with names like ‘Protect Our City’ only make use feel good but for no good reason. This won’t secure our borders.”

Pullen said he is expecting legal challenges from civil rights groups, such as the American Civil Liberties Union or the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund.

“They know if it gets on the ballot it will pass easily without me spending a penny on it,” Pullen said.

Danny Ortega, a Phoenix attorney who served as co-counsel on a MALDEF challenge of Proposition 200, said he would ask the organization to review Pullen’s initiative.

“It’s explosive and dangerous,” Ortega said. “It’s an initiative that will endanger the safety of every resident of Phoenix . . . (because) resources that would go into fighting dangerous crimes would be also used to apprehend and process alleged undocumented persons.”

Sgt. Joel Tranter, a Phoenix police spokesman, said the extra responsibility would put a strain on police officers who are already “extremely busy dealing with local issues.”

Pullen said that reasoning was “laughable” because a “large part of the crime is due to illegal aliens.”

Ortega said such statements weren’t factual and only served as a “political ploy to anger people into action.”

Pullen said it wasn’t about roundups but simply detaining and reporting “illegal aliens” police officers encounter during normal police work.

He said his initiative would end the Phoenix Police Department’s “sanctuary policy.”

“That policy tells police not to fulfill their oath, which is to enforce local, state and federal laws,” Pullen said.

The city’s mutual aid and jurisdiction policy outlines how police officers handle encounters with undocumented individuals. It instructs them not to arrest a person if his only violation is of a federal immigration law and not to notify immigration officials when an undocumented person is a victim or witness of a crime, has only committed a minor traffic offense or is seeking medical treatment.

Immigration officials are called in when police come across a house or vehicle being used in the smuggling of undocumented people or in a drug house, according to the policy.

Gordon said that making changes would be up to Phoenix voters. “And whatever they tell us, this mayor will be listening and carrying out their wishes.”
###

PRESS ADVISORY July 5, 2006

Contact: Randy Pullen 602-524-2241

The Protect Our City Committee will turn in 21,000 signatures for the Protect Our City Initiative to the Phoenix City Clerk at 10:30 AM, July 6, 2006. In order to qualify for the ballot in Phoenix, 14,844 valid signatures are required.

Randy Pullen, chairman of the committee, said, �I believe we have obtained enough valid signatures to qualify for a March 2007 election in Phoenix. I look forward to the campaign next year. The Mayor and the City Council are on record as opposing this initiative. They will have to explain to the voters of Phoenix why they oppose enforcing our immigration laws and have prohibited Phoenix police from arresting illegal aliens.�

The Protect Our City Initiative will amend the Phoenix city charter to require all officials, agencies, and personnel of the City of Phoenix, including the Phoenix Police Department, to cooperate with and assist federal immigration authorities in enforcing immigration laws within the boundaries of the city. Further, no official, personnel or agent of the City of Phoenix will be prohibited or in any way restricted from sending, receiving, or maintaining, information regarding the immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of any individual, or exchanging such information with any other federal, state or local government entity.
###
Read the Phoenix Police Department’s operation order 1.4.3 HERE. It is their internal, “catch and release don’t ask don’t tell” non-cooperation policy for illegal aliens. It denys officers the ability to ask about immigration status or call ICE unless the crime involves human or drug smuggling (CYA on ACLU racial profiling lawsuits). CONTACT WILLA AT 602.863.3050 OR RANDY PULLEN AT 480.607.6444. www.protectourcity.org
###

Protect Our City Overview

Senate Bill 1157 would have made it a Class 1 misdemeanor for illegal aliens to enter Arizona. A second offense would have result in the illegal alien being charged with a felony. It also would have empowered law enforcement officers to question the immigration status of anyone they had lawfully detained. This bill would have made Arizona law consistent with existing federal law.

The Protect Our City Initiative will amend the Phoenix city charter to require all officials, agencies, and personnel of the City of Phoenix, including the Phoenix Police Department, to cooperate with and assist federal immigration authorities in enforcing immigration laws within the boundaries of the city. Further, no official, personnel or agent of the City of Phoenix will be prohibited or in any way restricted from sending, receiving, or maintaining, information regarding the immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of any individual, or exchanging such information with any other federal, state or local government entity.

In order to qualify for the November 2006 ballot in Phoenix, 14,844 valid signatures need to be collected and submitted to the City Clerk by the first week of June.
An Initiative measure

PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CHARTER OF THE CITY OF phoENIX RELATING TO cooperation and assistance in enforcement of immigration laws.

Shall Chapter XXI of the Charter of the City of Phoenix entitled, �Miscellaneous Provisions� be amended by adding Section 11 to read as follows:

START_STATUTESEC. 11. COOPERATION AND ASSISTANCE IN ENFORCEMENT OF IMMIGRATION LAWS.

a. All officials, agencies, and personnel of the City of Phoenix shall fully comply with and, to the full extent permitted by law, support the enforcement of federal law prohibiting the entry into, presence or residence in the United States of aliens in violation of federal immigration law.

(1) No official, personnel or agent of the City of Phoenix may be prohibited or in any way restricted from sending, receiving, or maintaining, information regarding the immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of any individual, or exchanging such information with any other federal, state or local government entity, for the following official purposes:

a. Determination of eligibility for any federal, state or local public benefit, service or license which is restricted, in whole or in part, on the basis of immigration status;

b. Verification of any claim of legal domicile within the City of Phoenix where legal domicile is required by law or contract; or

c. Confirmation of the identity of any person detained by the Phoenix Police Department who claims not to be a citizen of the United States.

B. The Police Department of the city shall enter into a cooperative agreement with the United States Department of Homeland Security to designate officers as immigration officers qualified to investigate, apprehend, and detain aliens in the United States to the fullest extent consistent with state and federal law.

C. The requirements and obligations of this Section shall be implemented in a manner fully consistent with federal law regulating immigration and protecting the civil rights of citizens and aliens.

D. If any provision of this section is declared invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions of this section which can be given effect without the invalid provision. The provisions of this section are declared to be severable.

###

Phoenix residents want to end ’sanctuary’ status

By Jerry Seper
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
May 28, 2006

A citizens group is seeking the end of a policy that prevents Phoenix police officers from detaining suspected illegal aliens, questioning a person under arrest about immigration status or notifying federal authorities that an illegal alien is in custody.
Members of Protect Our City have started a petition drive to change the city’s charter to require that police officers, along with all other city agencies and employees, assist federal authorities in enforcing U.S. immigration law.
Randy Pullen, a Republican National Committeeman from Arizona and the project’s leader, told The Washington Times that he hopes to gather enough signatures to qualify the measure as an initiative on the city’s November ballot.
“As a sanctuary city, Phoenix is condoning illegal activity, and we need to put an end to that now,” said Mr. Pullen, a key proponent of Proposition 200, an Arizona initiative passed in 2004 that limits public services for illegal aliens. “When police come across an illegal alien, they need to be detained and reported.”
Phoenix is one of several cities in the United States listed as a so-called “sanctuary city,” meaning it does not enforce federal immigration laws. Its charter says the investigation and enforcement of immigration laws is the business of the Department of Homeland Security.
In Phoenix, police officers are not allowed to stop people to determine their immigration status, arrest people when the only violation is an infraction of federal immigration law, or notify Homeland Security that an illegal alien witnessed or was the victim of a crime, surfaced during a family disturbance, received a traffic ticket or sought medical attention.
Mr. Pullen’s measure would require all Phoenix officials, agencies and personnel to cooperate with and assist federal authorities in enforcing immigration laws within the city’s boundaries. In addition, it would mandate that no Phoenix official, personnel or agent could be prohibited from sending, receiving or maintaining information regarding a person’s immigration status, lawful or unlawful, or exchanging that information with federal, state or local governments.
To qualify for the November ballot in Phoenix, he said, 14,844 valid signatures need to be collected and submitted to the city clerk by the first week of June.
Phoenix Police Department officials have said their officers are not trained in immigration enforcement, although the officers do have a “very strong working relationship” with immigration authorities.
City Council members say they should not have to divert funds from fighting crime to rounding up illegal aliens. Mayor Phil Gordon recently told reporters he did not intend to turn the city’s police officers into immigration enforcers.
Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano, a Democrat, recently vetoed legislation that would have empowered law-enforcement officers in the state to question the immigration status of anyone lawfully detained, made it a misdemeanor for illegal aliens to enter Arizona, and a felony if they were apprehended twice.

###
Rep verbally attacks governor on immigration stance

Wednesday, April 19, 2006
By Frank Camacho / 3TV reporter

Immigration remains a hot-button issue nationwide and here in Arizona.

In the latest developments today at the state Capitol, Mesa Rep. Russell Pearce accused Gov. Janet Napolitano of malfeasances in office and the Protect Our City initiative was officially unveiled.

The governor’s veto of a controversial anti-immigration bill earlier this week apparently triggered the latest salvo of angry words.

The rhetoric is escalating absent congressional action on immigration reform.

On Tuesday, it reached a crescendo as anti-immigration hardliners took on the governor, the Phoenix Police Department and the undocumented.

“Senator Kyl had a great comment. You know this is not going to do anything and all it does is puts a huge unfunded mandate on local law enforcement,” Napolitano said.

It was a rather tame beginning this morning as the governor discussed the various reasons why she vetoed a bill which would have made immigrating to Arizona illegally a misdemeanor.

“Law enforcement was uniformly opposed to it,” she said.

That wasn’t good enough for Randy Pullen, who today unveiled his Protect Our City initiative which would mandate Phoenix police officers enforce federal immigration laws.

“They have stopped an illegal alien – obviously an illegal alien, no driver’s license, no registration, no insurance, no habla Ingles and it’s clear they are an illegal alien. They have everything they need to detain that person at that point. They can’t detain them because Operations Order 1.4 won’t allow them to do that,” Pullen said.

The real fireworks began when Pearce launched into a bitter verbal attack on the governor.

“It is absolutely her not doing her job. She is in violation of that oath of office in my opinion. Absolutely hold her accountable as well as other elected officials who continue to ignore violations of the law who wink and nod and let this crisis go on. Absolutely, shame on them,” he said.

Pearce went on accuse the governor of malfeasance in office.

“When she refuses to put the National Guard on the border, vetoes the bills that would do �. Her No. 1 job is to protect American citizens and not be Vicente Fox’s first,” he said.

The governor meanwhile said such comments are unfortunate and are not helpful in trying to solve a difficult problem.

“I think a lot of ideas that are floated around to look ‘tough’ are ideas when you really analyze them [that] aren’t really tough and not really effective. They are just bumper stickers,” she said.

###
Police, Legislature at odds on professionalism

Apr. 19, 2006 12:00 AM

There’s a reason the Arizona Legislature disregarded Arizona’s law-enforcement officials when passing a law that made illegal presence in the country punishable under the state’s trespassing statutes.

It’s because the law was mainly intended to give cover to rogue officers who would violate department orders to protect the country.

The law was fantasy anyway. Even if the governor didn’t veto it, it faced a court challenge. And most chiefs and sheriffs in the state said they had no interest in making officers arrest undocumented immigrants.

But one of the bill’s sponsors had even more fantastic thoughts. Rep. Russell Pearce, R-Mesa, told me, after a legislative hearing on the bill, that he expected officers to violate policy and enforce the law.

Pearce, during the hearing, had expressed disdain for Phoenix police after a lieutenant testified against the bill. “This is another attempt by law enforcement not to do their job,” Pearce testified. “They’ve decided they want to be spectators to the destruction of our nation.”

Phoenix police decline to arrest non-criminals who are here in violation of immigration laws. Not so the country is destroyed, but so those residents can come to police as crime victims or informants.

An officer who decides to violate department orders will be subject to discipline, said Detective Tony Morales, a department spokesman.

“This is a professional organization,” Morales said.

Unlike, for example, the Arizona Legislature.

Reach Ruelas at (602) 444-8473 or [email protected].
###
“Local Law Enforcement�s Inherent Authority of Immigration Law:”

Congress has firmly established that there is a significant public interest in the effective enforcement of immigration law. Congress could have chosen to limit local enforcement pursuant to its plenary power over immigration, but it has not done so. In the absence of a limitation on local enforcement powers, the states are bound by the Supremacy Clause of the United �States Constitution to enforce violations of the federal immigration laws. “The statutory law of the United States is part of the law of each state just as if it were written into state statutory law.”

Often a misunderstanding of the relationship between federal criminal and immigration law causes one to believe being present in the U.S. in violation of immigration law is civil and “not a crime” and is clearly wrong. The enforcement role given to local government by the Constitution and the Congress is clear. Unsanctioned entry into the United States is a crime.

State and local law enforcement officials have the general power to investigate and arrest violators of federal immigration statutes without prior INS knowledge or approval, as long as state law does not restrict such general power.

The U.S. has a “compelling interest” in the criminal prosecution of immigration law violators, which is a part of a comprehensive, essential sovereign policy of uniform immigration law enforcement.

In Sections 1324 the language that referred to officers “of the United States” when talking about authority to arrest was stricken from section 1324 by amendment. In People v. Baraja, a California court concluded, “that change can only mean that the scope of the arrest power under section 1324 was enlarged; in no way can it mean that the scope of arrest under the other two sections was restricted. Such an acute non sequitur would attribute to the Congress both serious inconsistency and profound lack of logic.”

The arrest, detention, or transportation of aliens by local police enforcing criminal provisions of the INA is not a regulatory “determination” of the conditions of alien entrance and residency, but merely enforcement of the previously determined conditions. States can prosecute illegal aliens under state laws without running afoul of the INA. State and local laws do not attempt to regulate who may come to and stay in the U.S. , and thus do not impinge upon the federal government�s exclusive power to regulate immigration, even if they affect immigrants.

Other important amendments to federal law enacted in 1996 were intended by Congress to encourage state and local agencies to participate in the process of enforcing civil as well as criminal federal immigration laws by providing incentives such as reduced liability and specialized training.

In 1999 a decision in the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the independent authority of local police departments to enforce federal immigration law, as long as state law prescribing police power of arrest authorized such an arrest. The U.S. Dept. of Justice endorsed this doctrine in April 2002. Under Attorney General Ashcroft, the U.S. Dept. of Justice took the position that state and local police have inherent authority to enforce civil immigration laws.

Assistant Attorney General Kobach explained that the inherent arrest authority of states arises from their pre-constitutional status as sovereign entities. The powers retained by the states at the time of ratification proceeded “not from the people of the United States, but from the people of the several states,” and remain unchanged, except as they have been “abridged” by the Constitution. The authority of a state to arrest for violations of federal law is thus not delegated; but “inheres in the ability of one sovereign to accommodate the interests of another sovereign.” This federalism-based analysis has a strong judicial pedigree.

The courts also ruled (Miller v. U.S., 357 U.S. 301, 305(1958) that a warrant less arrest “of an arrest for violation of federal law by state peace officers, �the lawfulness of the arrest without warrant is to be determined by reference to state law.”

Sanctuary policies are illegal. Local, state, or federal government agencies that sanction or retaliate against employees or officials who report immigration law violations to ICE or the Border Patrol can be sued by the whistleblower under 8 U.S.C. 1373 or 8 U.S.C. 1644 for damages and costs.

Citizens have a constitutional right to expect the protection of federal laws which prohibit unauthorized activities by non-citizens are denied equal protection when a police department or magistrate acts in a manner that encourages or assists persons selected on the basis of nationality or alienage to engage in such unlawful activities.

Aggrieved residents may sue in state or federal court to block unlawful municipal passive resistance policies (so called Sanctuary Policies), and may sue officials and employees in their official or private capacities for violations of their rights. Local government officials do not possess Eleventh Amendment immunity or qualified immunity when sued in their official for prospective injunctive or declaratory relief to end statutory and constitutional violations.

“Harboring” includes any conduct that tends to substantially help an alien to remain in the United States unlawfully. Criminal liability for harboring or sheltering could arise from acceptance of a Mexican matricula consular � which, presented without proper immigration documents, is prima facie evidence of illegal alien status � by a local government agency that , for example, provide housing or utility assistance, made referrals to a public or private job assistance program or detained matricula presenters for violation of city ordinances and release them without verifying their immigration status with the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

No policy or humanitarian argument has been identified by the courts that would negate the criminal mens rea of reckless disregard for the fact that aliens are present in the United States in violation of law. Neither sanctuary nor humanitarian concern is a valid defense to either civil or criminal violations of the Immigration and Nationality Act. It is illegal for non-profit, religious, or civic organizations to knowingly assist in the commission of an alien smuggling felony, regardless of claims that their member� convictions may require them to assist aliens. The First Amendment does not protect actions that aid illegal aliens to remain in the United States.

Illegal aliens are not a suspect class entitled to Fourteenth Amendment based strict scrutiny of any discriminatory classification based on that status, nor are they defined by an immutable characteristic, since their status is the product of conscious unlawful action.

Every alien who has seen issued a registration document is a required to carry the document on his or her person. Federal regulations specify the immigration document that are evidence of alien registration. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that the unregistered presence of an alien in the U.S. is in itself a crime. Failure to register is a continuing violation for which there is no statute of limitations. Other criminal misdemeanors are failure to have a registration card in personal possession ($100 fine and /or 30 days imprisonment), and failure to report a change of address ($200 fine and /or 30 days).

A law enforcement officer has probable cause to detain an individual who admits he or she is an alien (legal or illegal) but is not in possession of registration documents. This is a crime that a warrant less arrest can be made in most jurisdictions.

Immigration document fraud is a felony enforceable by local police officers under 18 U.S.C. 1028. Criminalizes eight types of knowing conduct that relate to false identification documents.

The Bail Reform Act of 1984 created a powerful detention provision that authorizes a state of local police officer to arrest any alien other than a legal permanent resident for a federal “offense,” and to request a local magistrate to temporarily detain the alien for up to ten days without bail while awaiting transfer into federal custody, so long as the alien is found to be a “flight risk” or danger to any other person or the community.”

The authority to make arrest for federal offenses under 18 U.S.C. 3041 extends to state and local law enforcement officers. (U.S. v Bowdach, 561 F.2d 1160, 1168 (5th Cir. 1977) An illegal alien is an inherent flight risk.

Supreme Court Ruling Razes Artificial Fire Wall Between Local Law Enforcement and Immigration Enforcement (Muehler v. Mena) 9-0 Landmark Decision (Washington D.C.�April 1, 2005) In its March 22 ruling in the case of Muehler v. Mena, the Supreme Court removed barriers that prevent local law enforcement officers from questioning the immigration status of individuals they suspect to be in the United States illegally. In this groundbreaking decision, the high Court rejected the claim of Ira Mena, a permanent resident of the U.S., that police had violated the Fourth Amendment while conducting a lawful search of her home.

The Fourth Amendment provides protection by establishing that persons be shielded against unreasonable search and seizure. Mena argued that by questioning her, and the illegal alien detainees about their immigration status during a lawful search, officers violated her Fourth Amendment rights. Mena further claimed that questions asked about her citizenship required officers to have had independent reasonable suspicion regarding the unlawfulness of her immigration status.

Calling a decision by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals “faulty,” the Supreme Court held that “mere police questioning [regarding one�s immigration status] does not constitute a seizure.” The Court continued its landmark ruling on this issue by stating that “the officers did not need reasonable suspicion to ask Mena for her name, date of birth, or immigration status.”

“Whatever legal fig leaf many police departments have been using to justify policies of non-cooperation with federal immigration authorities, has been stripped away by this landmark Supreme Court decision,”

“If local police are barred from cooperating with federal authorities in the enforcement of U.S. immigration laws it is purely a political decision on the part of local politicians and police chiefs. There is no legal barrier to local police inquiring about a person�s immigration status and then acting upon the information they gather.”

Congress expressly intended for local law enforcement to act in cases in which officers have reason to believe that an individual is in the country illegally, even though immigration law enforcement is not their primary responsibility. In 1996, Congress passed and President Clinton signed legislation that protects individual officers who act to enforce federal immigration laws, even if their departments have non-cooperation policies.

“In Muehler v. Mena the Court reinforced the clear intent of Congress in this matter,” said Stein. “Inquiring about an individual�s immigration status can and should be a routine part of ascertaining information, no different than asking questions about one�s name, or date and place of birth. Local police come into contact with people who are violating federal immigration laws on a daily basis. Freeing local police to inquire about an individual�s immigration status and allowing them to act is essential to curbing mass illegal immigration and protecting our homeland security.”

Any decision by law enforcement not to enforce immigration laws is a political decision by politicians and local police chiefs, not a lack of authority.

A recent Memo by the U.S. Justice Dept. makes it clear local law enforcement can enforce immigration laws.

###

Measure targets immigrants, Would have local officials aid feds
Monica Alonzo-Dunsmoor
The Arizona Republic
Apr. 15, 2006 12:00 AM

A group of Phoenix residents is pushing for local officials, including police officers, to help federal authorities enforce immigration laws within the city.

The group, calling itself Protect Our City, registered the organization Friday with the City Clerk�s Office and will soon start collecting the 14,844 valid signatures needed to get the measure on the ballot.

Randy Pullen, chairman of the group, is a former Phoenix mayoral candidate and a key backer of Proposition 200, a voter-approved measure aimed at restricting certain public benefits to undocumented immigrants and preventing them from voting.
This latest initiative seeks to change the City Charter and, among other things, would require local officials to help enforce federal immigration laws.

It also asks the city to �enter into an agreement with the United State Department of Homeland Security to designate officers as immigration officers qualified to investigate, apprehend, and detain aliens in the United States.�

Pullen said that it isn�t about rounding up people.

�I�m not saying they should go out and sweep, but if in normal police work they come across an illegal alien, they need to detain them and report them to ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) officials,� he said.

Mayor Phil Gordon was unavailable for comment.

Councilman Greg Stanton said he would not support such a measure.

�This is a federal issue,� he said. �It�s not right to divert our local police officers from their first responsibility, which is to fight street crime in Phoenix.�

Reach the reporter at monica [email protected] or (602) 444-2478.

Phoenix Operation Order 1.4.3 (Policy as written)

The investigation and enforcement of federal laws relating to illegal entry and residence in the United States is specifically assigned to the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) of the United States Department of Justice.

Officers will not stop persons for the sole purpose of determining immigration status.

Officers will not arrest a person when the only violation is an infraction of a federal immigration law.

Officers will not contact INS/Border Patrol for the sole purpose of interpreting.

Officers may transport INS prisoners only in life-threatening situations, or when exigent circumstances exist.

Officers will not notify INS/Border Patrol of undocumented persons under the following conditions:

They are victims and/or witnesses of a crime

When contacted during family disturbances

The enforcement of minor traffic offenses

When the person(s) is/are seeking medical treatment

If an undocumented person is arrested, the decision to notify INS will be based on the following criteria:

If the offense is a minor traffic violation, INS will not be notified. (Felony DUI offenders will be turned over to INS when feasible.)

If the offense is a misdemeanor and the person meets the cite-and-release criteria, an ATTC may be issued.

INS will not be notified by the Phoenix Police Department if the person is released.

If the undocumented person is booked into jail, INS is automatically notified by MCSO based on the information given in the �place of birth� and �citizenship� information blocks on the booking slip.

If the person will be released from police custody (not booked) pending further investigation, INS will not be notified.

Officers will notify INS/Border Patrol when undocumented persons are contacted under the following conditions:

Drop House – A house or building being used as a transfer or holding facility for smuggling undocumented persons.

Load Vehicles – Used in smuggling undocumented persons.

Drug House – House or building being used for narcotics trafficking.

An INS Duty Agent can be contacted 24 hours a day at (602)379-3116.Officers will cooperate with INS agents in INS law enforcement activities.The cooperative effort of the Violent Gang Task Force involves the INS targeting of criminally active and violent undocumented gang members.

The mission of the Violent Gang Task Force does not involve the identification and/or deportation of undocumented persons unless they are involved in criminal gang activity.
###

Immigration Policy / I.C.E. (Phoenix PD internal memo regarding 1.4.3.)

The Phoenix Police Department�s Mutual Aid procedures are currently being addressed in local news outlets in the valley. Procedures regarding undocumented persons could have serious potential consequences for any law enforcement agency and the criminal justice system. It has been a long standing philosophy of the Phoenix Police Department to treat everyone in our community in a just manner. We do not enforce immigration laws other than when it relates directly to violent crime including human smuggling and drug trafficking. As our involvement with these types of issues increases, employees are reminded to adhere to the procedures enumerated in Operations Order 1.4.3, Mutual Aid and Jurisdiction.

Officers will not stop persons for the sole purpose of determining immigration status.
Officers will not arrest a person when the only violation is an infraction of federal immigration law.
Officers will not contact ICE/Border Patrol for the sole purpose of interpreting.
Officers will not notify ICE/Border Patrol of undocumented persons under the following conditions:

When the contacted person is a victim and/or witness of a crime
When contacted during a family disturbance
The enforcement of minor traffic offenses
When the person(s) is/are seeking medical treatment

If an undocumented person is arrested, the decision to notify ICE will be based on the following criteria:
If the offense is a minor traffic violation, ICE will not be notified. (Felony DUI offenders will be turned over to ICE when feasible.)
If the offense is a misdemeanor and the person meets the cite-and-release criteria, an ATTC may be issued.
ICE will not be notified by the Phoenix Police Department if the person is released.
If the person will be released from police custody (not booked) pending further investigation, ICE will not be notified.

The Violent Crime Bureau (VCB) Desk Sergeant will be the department liaison with ICE, and may make contact with them in reference to Drop Houses, Load Vehicles, Drug Houses, and other crimes. (The remainder of the policy can be found in Operations Order manuals and/or online at phoenixpolice.com.)

Employees are encouraged to review the entire order. Questions reference the policy should be directed through an employee�s chain of command. The Community and Patrol Services Bureau is also a valuable resource and can be reached at 602-262-7331 during normal business hours. After hours, the radio supervisor may contact the on-call Community and Patrol Services Bureau representative.I support the men and women of our organization and trust that each of you will continue to conduct yourselves professionally, reflecting the positive image this agency has come to represent both within the city and throughout the country.

###

Murders, Deaths and Maimings by Illegal Aliens in Arizona

Officer Kenneth Collings of the Phoenix Police Department was killed in 1988 during the arrest of two robbery suspects at a local bank when one opened fire. One of the robbers, Ismael Conde, was quickly arrested but the other, Rudy Romero, escaped to Mexico. Romero was caught in southern Mexico in 2000 and brought back to stand trial. The Arizona Attorney General’s Office credits help from the Phoenix Police Department, the FBI, the Attorney General for the Republic of Mexico, and the Mexican Federal Agency of Investigation – a rare and welcome act of extradition from our southern neighbor. In March 2003, Romero was sentenced to 98 years in state prison.

Phoenix Police Officer Marc Atkinson was just 28 when he was shot and killed in a 1999 ambush by an illegal alien from Mexico. Officer Atkinson was a five-year veteran of the Phoenix Police Force, and was survived by his wife Karen, infant son and two siblings. The killer, Felipe Petrona-Cabanas, had around a pound of cocaine in his car when apprehended with two other Mexican nationals. The three came from a farming area in the state of Guerrero near Acapulco, and said they came to the United States to work but couldn’t find any. A notable detail in the case is how an armed citizen, Rory Vertigan, came to the aid of the shot officer and helped apprehend the Mexicans, who certainly would have escaped over the border if they could have.

Phoenix Police Officer Robert Sitek was shot four times 4/12/03 during a traffic stop altercation with an illegal alien that became violent. Sitek and his partner David Thwing were on routine patrol when a red truck cut off their squad car, and when the officers stopped the truck the driver began shooting. Officer Sitek was in cardiac arrest by the time he reached the hospital and lost a considerable amount of blood. Shooter Francisco A. Gallardo was a “Mexican citizen who had recently completed a seven-year prison term for aggravated assault.” He had been deported after his release but had returned to Arizona. Gallardo was shot and killed as he tried to escape by Officer Thwing.
Medical Update, June 5, 2003: Officer Rob Sitek has had a slow but gradually successful recovery from injuries that surely would have been fatal to most. At nearly two months after the shooting, he has pulled out of a three-week coma, is still unable to walk but is determined to do so and eventually return to work.

The murder of Kris Eggle a park ranger in the Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument in southern Arizona on August 9, 2002, was little noted by the media, although the press has paid considerable attention to the deaths of illegal aliens on the border. By contrast, Ranger Eggle was shot down by Mexican drug dealers who were using Organ Pipe as a route for their smuggling. Only 28 when he was murdered, Eggle was a valedictorian and an Eagle Scout who joined the National Park Service because he loved the outdoors. (Organ Pipe is considered to be the most dangerous of the national park system: 200,000 illegal aliens and 700,000 pounds of drugs were intercepted at the park in 2001.) The Eggle family is determined that his death will not be forgotten by working for real border control, including a Washington press conference with Tom Tancredo in the fall of 2002. The Eggles have a family website, www.kriseggle.org, to inform interested parties about what they are doing.

Border Patrol Agent James Epling died in performing his duties along the Mexican border, apparently drowning in the Colorado River in pursuit of several illegal aliens and was last seen along the shoreline as he followed the foreigners. He was the seventh Border officer to die in the line of duty in Yuma. Agent Epling was just 24 and was the father of three, going on four. His father-in-law is a retired Border Patrol agent from the McAllen, Texas, sector.
Just before disappearing, Epling had pulled a Chinese woman illegal alien out of the river. Three other Chinese were taken into custody the night of the disappearance, along with one Mexican believed to be the smuggler. Although there has been no evidence of foul play actually found, the smuggler can be charged in the death.

These two deputies were shot Dec. 16 in Mesa by an illegal alien whom they were trying to arrest while executing a search warrant. Fortunately, both have wounds that are not life threatening, although Lewis Argetsinger may lose the use of his hand. Sean Pearce was shot in the chest but was protected by body armor; he was hit in the stomach just below the vest. Sean Pearce is the son of Rep. Russell Pearce of the Arizona legislature who was in Washington to appear on an immigration panel at the Brookings Institute when he received the news that his son had been shot. Russell Pearce was an active supporter of Prop. 200 which won at the polls in November and requires that voters and would-be welfare recipients show proof of citizenship.

Sgt. Manuel H. Tapia was shot at about 7 p.m. Jan. 7, 1991, in Nogales by a drug suspect. He died at about 1 a.m. Jan. 8, 1991, at Tucson Medical Center. The suspect, Noel Gonzales-Bernal of Nogales, Sonora, Mexico, was fatally shot by a Nogales police officer. The incident occurred in Nogales, about a mile north of the border, after Tapia and the Nogales police officer stopped the suspect’s Thunderbird. Upon asking the suspect to open the vehicle’s trunk, the suspect fled on foot with Sgt. Tapia chasing him. The suspect then turned and shot Sgt. Tapia. The suspect was then shot. It was later learned that Sgt. Tapia was unarmed, having inadvertently left his weapon in his vehicle.

Officer Robert K. Martin, 57, a 27-year veteran with the Department, was shot to death during a traffic stop on the Beeline Highway on August 15, 1995, about seven miles north of Shea Boulevard. His assailant, Ernesto Salgado Martinez, a 19-year-old ex-convict from Globe, fled the scene and was captured two days later in California. Today, Martinez awaits sentencing after being convicted on Sept. 26, 1997, on one count of first-degree murder, two counts of theft and two counts of misconduct. He was sentenced to death by lethal injection on Aug. 18, 1998, by Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Christopher Skelly.

Agent Richard Fass, 37, of the United States Drug Enforcement Agency, was murdered on June 30, 1994. Agent Fass went to a strip mall in Glendale, Arizona to complete a narcotics transaction. He was shot six times in the head at point blank range with a .45 caliber handgun. The two shooters were quickly arrested, prosecuted, convicted and sentenced to life without the possibility of parole, plus 55 years. The mastermind of the plot to kill Agent Fass was Augustin Vasquez-Mendoza and the Mexican government refused to extradite him to the US. Vasquez-Mendoza is from Mexico.

Agent Alexander Kirpnick, 27, of the United States Border Patrol, was murdered on June 3, 1998. Agent Kirpnick and his partner stopped Bernardo Velardez-Lopez, Julio Cesar Arenas-Hernandez, Manuel Gamez, and Juan Manuel Umares-Rivas, while transporting marijuana in backpacks across a well-known drug corridor west of Nogales. Agent Kirpnick had defendant Velardez-Lopez on his knees and was searching him when two of the suspects broke away from Kirpnick’s partner and ran. As Kirpnick became temporarily distracted by the escape, Velardez-Lopez removed a concealed gun and shot Agent Kirpnick in the head. Velardez-Lopez is from Mexico.

Jason Schechterle suffered fourth-degree burns when his patrol car went up in flames after being struck by a taxi. In May of 2001 Phoenix Officer Jason Schechterle, on the force 13 months, was responding to a hot call from an adjacent precinct. Officers from that precinct were occupied on other calls, so Officer Jason Schechterle took the call himself. With his lights and siren on, he came to a stop at a red light at an intersection under a freeway overpass. As he was preparing to proceed, his cruiser was struck from behind by a taxi cab going 115 mph. His Crown Vic erupted in flames traveled 226 feet and came to a stop about 50 feet from a fire truck across the street. Rogelio Gutierrez, the taxi driver, was an illegal alien who had been cited at least four times for driving illegally. He was an epileptic who had not been taking his medication. Gutierrez was found guilty of assault and currently is spending 12 years in prison. He offered no apology.

In another case of justice denied, the murderer of Phoenix high school student Tanee Natividad merely crossed the border into Mexico to escape law enforcement. A local television station was able to track down the murderer in a bar just a few miles across the border without much effort. Max LaMadrid has no reason to hide because the Mexican government actually helps violent criminals escape American justice. According to then Arizona Attorney General Janet Napolitano, action by the Mexican Supreme Court making it more difficult to extradite criminals has “created an incentive for people to flee into Mexico as a safe harbor.” At one time, Mexico would not extradite criminals who might be subject to the death penalty; the Mexican court recently extended this “protection” to any Mexican who might receive a life sentence, thereby giving a free pass to rapists, kidnappers and child molesters. In fact, the investigating reporter found 100 cases of violent criminals from the Phoenix area escaping into Mexico in just the last few years. Meanwhile, the grieving family of 16-year-old Tanee gets no justice – like thousands of others in the southwest.

Another tragic addition to the list of unnecessary deaths caused by violent illegal aliens was the newlywed couple, James and Emilia Lee of Huachuca City, Arizona, who had been married only six weeks. They were killed Oct. 16 when a truckload of at least 17 illegal aliens traveling at 90 mph crashed into several vehicles near the town of Sierra Vista, leaving a horrific scene of carnage. The aliens were trying to escape police after they had run a stop sign, and the truck rammed into a line of nine vehicles waiting for a turn light near Fort Huachuca. James was 75 and his new bride Emilia was 71. The couple had been planning a fishing trip to Mexico with Joe and other relatives. Both James and Emilia were known as neighborly, never hesitating to reach out to help. James often helped out when someone needed a home repair done, and Emilia was an active volunteer for her church. Nearly 300 friends and family attended the services for the Lees held Oct. 21.