CAIR California Template by jolinmilioncherie


									Presented By Angela Chan, Staff Attorney
   Juvenile Justice and Education Project
1.   This year marks the 20th anniversary of San
     Francisco's Sanctuary Ordinance. What is it? What
     is its purpose?
2.   How have the recent media attacks on the
     Sanctuary Ordinance resulted in San Francisco
     referring over 160 immigrant youth to Immigration
     and Customs Enforcement?
3.   How is San Francisco’s immigrant community
     responding to these attacks?
             What is the Sanctuary Ordinance?

Prohibits use of local employees or resources to
   assist with federal immigration enforcement.

       There are over 80 counties or cities with
          Sanctuary or Sanctuary-like policies.

•   1985: Mayor Dianne Feinstein signed legislation
    passed by the Board of Supervisors that designated
    San Francisco as a sanctuary city for immigrants, who
    fled civil war and political persecution in El Salvador
    and Guatemala, but were unable to gain asylum in the
    United States.

•   1989: Four years later, San Francisco’s Board of
    Supervisors unanimously extended the policy to all
    immigrants. The city could not use its resources or
    funds to assist immigration law enforcement, except
    where required by federal law.
What is the purpose of the Sanctuary

                       Public Safety

            Nondiscrimination Policy

                  Civic Engagement
•   1996: Juvenile Probation issues a policy towards
    undocumented youth. INS (now known as ICE) is
    aware of this policy:
    • Juveniles, who are suspected of being undocumented, are not
      referred to INS by Juvenile Probation unless there is an
      immigration hold on a youth or the probation officer requests
      and receives permission from the court to report the youth.
    • Undocumented youth are treated the same as other youth and
      receive similar dispositions, e.g., probation, group homes,
      county and state facilities.
    • If there is a placement failure, probation officers may request
      that the judge allow the probation officer to repatriate the
      youth with his or her family in accordance with state law.
•   June – July 2008: SF Chronicle publishes a series of “special reports”
    about the undocumented youth issue under the title “Sanctuary Shielding
    Immigrants.” Here are some of the headlines:
     •   Feds probe S.F.'s migrant-offender shield 06/29/08 (Chronicle)
     •   8 crack dealers shielded by S.F. walk away 07/01/08 (Chronicle)
     •   EDITORIAL: No sanctuary for drug dealers 07/03/08 (Chronicle)
     •   S.F. mayor shifts policy on illegal offenders 07/03/08 (Chronicle)
     •   S.F. working on protocol for teen illegals 07/10/08 (Chronicle)
     •   S.F. juvenile hall braces for detainee surge 07/04/08 (Chronicle)
     •   S.F. IDs 10 possible illegal youths to feds 07/12/08 (Chronicle)
     •   San Francisco cooperates with feds on immigration 07/13/08 (Chronicle)
     •   Slaying suspect once found sanctuary in SF 07/20/08 (Chronicle)
     •   Opinion: Sanctuary policy made city less safe 07/22/08 (Chronicle)
     •   Minutemen protest S.F.'s sanctuary policy 07/31/08 (Chronicle)
     •   S.F. fund aids teen felons who are illegals 08/03/08 (Chronicle)
     •   Panel urges S.F. to help teen immigrant felons 08/19/08 (Chronicle)
     •   Family blames sanctuary policy in 3 slayings 08/23/08 (Chronicle)
•   San Francisco Chronicle articles
•   Mayor Gavin Newsom runs for governor
•   The Bush Administration cracks down on immigration enforcement
     • The National Fugitive Operations – Fastest growing program in the
       DHS immigration enforcement program with a budget that
       increased from $9 million in 2003 to $218 million last year. In its
       first five years, the program has received more than $625 million.
     • May 2008 – ICE raids 11 El Balazo Restaurants and detains 63
       alleged undocumented persons in San Francisco, San Ramon,
       Lafayette, Concord, Pleasanton and Danville.
     • May 2008 through April 2009 - ICE raids the homes of several San
       Francisco families, forcibly entering their residences without
•   U.S. Attorney Joseph Russoniello (who was also a U.S. Attorney in the
    1980’s) threatens San Francisco with prosecution for harboring
    undocumented youth.
July 2008: Juvenile Probation implements new policy
requiring that probation officers refer youth suspected of
being undocumented to ICE right after arrest:
 • BEFORE youth are appointed a public defender.
 • BEFORE youth receive due process.
 • BASED on felony charges from the police, not a court
   finding of guilt.

To Date: According to ICE,
over 167 youth have been
referred to ICE by Juvenile Probation
under the Mayor’s policy.
    Policy -
 in July 2008

  Policy –
 Passed in
 Nov. 2009
 What are the problems with
the Mayor’s July 2008 policy?
(1) The new policy is modeled after the adult criminal justice system, and violates
well-established juvenile law and procedure.

(2) Automatic referral at booking to ICE will result in premature and erroneous
referrals, and will dismantle crucial protections against racial profiling and pre-
textual arrests.
 Notifying ICE at booking will result in reporting youth who have not committed an
offense. According to San Francisco juvenile probation, in 2006, 30% or 361 of the
1215 petitions filed by the District Attorney’s did not result in a sustained petition.

(3) Probation officers are not qualified to determine immigration status.
 Determination of immigration status is complex, and youth themselves are often
unaware of their own status. The new process subjects the City to potential liability
because youth who have legal immigration status may be mistakenly referred to ICE.
(See, e.g., Soto-Torres v. Johnson, CIV S-99-1695 WBS/DAD (E.D. Cal. filed Aug. 30,
1999) (County and federal officials paid $100,000 to settle case after county probation
officer made erroneous determination).
(4) With respect to youth who have family in the United States, the City’s
   policy runs counter to the family reunification goals of the juvenile
   system mandated by state law.
 Youth who have lived their entire lives in the U.S. will be orphaned by a blanket
    policy that refers all youth to ICE regardless of their particular circumstances.

(5) The policy undermines the ability of undocumented youth to pursue
   immigration relief to which they may be entitled under federal law.
   Congress has created several means by which undocumented youth may apply to
    adjust their immigration status, including Special Immigrant Juvenile Status for
    children who have been abused, abandoned or neglected; asylum for children who
    have been persecuted in their countries of origin; “T” visas for children who are
    the victims of trafficking; and “U” visas for children who are the victims of
    enumerated crimes.
   Notifying ICE at the booking stage will effectively cut off these avenues of federal
    immigration relief for a majority of eligible youth. ICE neither screens youth for
    potential forms of relief nor provides them with immigration attorneys. ICE also
    often transfers youth to detention facilities in remote areas without legal service
    agencies, making it virtually impossible for them to assert a viable claim for relief.
•   Formed in Fall 2008, the San Francisco Immigrant Rights Defense
    Committee is a growing alliance of immigrant rights advocates, labor
    groups, faith leaders, youth advocates, and LGBT activists.
•   The Committee includes:
    The African Immigrant and Refugee Resource Center, ALDI, Arab Resource and Organizing
    Center, Asian Law Caucus, Asian Youth Advocacy Network, Central American Resource
    Center, Chinese for Affirmative Action, Communities United Against Violence, Dolores
    Street Community Services, EBASE, Global Exchange, Filipino Community Center, Harvey
    Milk LGBT Democratic Club, H.O.M.E.Y., Immigrant Legal Resource Center, Instituto
    Familiar de la Raza, La Raza Centro Legal, La Voz Latina, Legal Services for Children,
    Movement for Unconditional Amnesty, Mujeres Unidas y Activas, National Lawyers Guild--
    San Francisco Chapter, PODER, POWER, Pride at Work, SF Immigrant Legal & Education
    Network, SF Labor Council, SFOP, St. Peter’s Housing, Tenderloin Housing Clinic, Worker
    Immigrant Rights Coalition, Young Workers United.
•   In November 2009, hundreds of immigrant community
    members were successful in passing a new policy at the Board
    of Supervisors, by a vote of 8 to 3, to restore due process to
    immigrant youth.
     • Under the new policy, juvenile probation can only report
       youth to ICE AFTER a judge finds that the youth actually
       committed a felony.
•   BUT Mayor Newsom is
     refusing to follow this new
     policy, and City Attorney
     Herrera will not advise
   Four rallies at City Hall
   Townhall meeting with City
   Meetings with members of
    the Board of Supervisors
   Meetings with Mayor’s Office
   Meeting with SF Chronicle’s
    Editorial Board
   Resolutions Passed by the
    Immigrant Rights
    Commission, Youth
    Commission, and SF
    Democratic Party
   Highlighting specific cases
    were the outcome was
    extremely unjust – e.g.,
    Washington family case
                                        What’s Next?

       Call Mayor Newsom at (415) 554-6141 to:
     Demand that San Francisco follow the new policy
        and stop tearing apart innocent families.

To learn or to get involved, please contact
              For More Information :
         Angela Chan, Staff Attorney
                   Asian Law Caucus
        For Pro Bono Opportunities:

To top