Last week Bloomington came face to face with the Trump administration’s assault on civil liberty. A headline on The Bloomingtonian sums up the situation: “Federal Immigration Raids Rattle Bloomington Community; Mayor Issues Statement Saying City Has Limited Authority Over Federal Matters.“
Mayor Kerry Thomson surely is correct about the city’s “limited authority in this [immigration] space.” Indeed, the city is constrained both by the federal government and the state. Gov. Mike Braun recently signed HB 1393 which mandates county sheriffs notify ICE if a law enforcement officer arrests someone and has probable cause to believe they are in the country illegally.
Attorney General Todd Rokita has sued the Monroe County Sheriff’s Office over immigration-related policies Rokita contends conflict with state and federal laws.
Thomson, like every mayor who cares, is in a very difficult position. But I have to ask: What exactly is the city’s understanding of “the bounds of the law,” and how seriously prepared is the city to make sure the “bounds of the law” are respected?
In her statement, Thomson asserts “Federal immigration enforcement falls outside the City’s legal authority. We cannot prevent federal officers from operating within their jurisdiction. … While the City remains guided by principles of dignity and safety, we operate within legal frameworks established by the federal government.” When the federal government is uprooting long-established “legal frameworks,” this statement evades a responsibility other public officials have proven willing to embrace.
In Indianapolis, Police Chief Chris Bailey, supported by the head of Indianapolis Fraternal Order of Police, said, “If you are in Indianapolis and are a victim of a crime or need assistance, we are here to help — regardless of your immigration status … The officers and professional staff of the IMPD are dedicated to serving you, and you can expect to be treated with dignity and respect at all times.”
Residents need to believe they have no reason to fear local law enforcement officers, and that, regardless of their citizenship status, they have a right to be protected. Any person who feels endangered or threatened ought to feel safe calling the police.
Two recent incidents show why reassurance is especially important right now. One headline read, “Robbery suspects posed as ICE agents, North Carolina family says.” The second, “’We’re citizens!’: Oklahoma City family traumatized after ICE raids home, but they weren’t suspects.”
There are similarities in what happened to these families. In both cases strangers arrived unannounced, declared themselves to be ICE agents while displaying no regard for due process, subjected private homes to a search, temporarily detained and humiliated the occupants, and absconded with a substantial amount of property.
For all intents and purposes, both were home invasions.
In the North Carolina case, ordinary thieves figured out they might mimic ICE agents to commit a crime. After, it was determined by law enforcement that they were not in fact ICE agents. But what is the role of local law enforcement in the Oklahoma City case?
“We are there to help” suggests something more robust than “we have limited authority in this immigration space.” While ICE agents may insist they have the authority to act in a lawless manner, the people have rights, and they need local police to protect them.
I submit that every resident of Bloomington ought to feel confident of at least two things.
First, that the Bloomington Police Department assumes no responsibility for the enforcement of federal immigration law, even in the face of White House or Indiana executive orders.
Second, that the department stands ready to enforce ordinary laws of criminal trespass. If federal law enforcement seeks to enter a private home or detain a private individual, they must be prepared to furnish a properly authorized warrant to local police, and pursue their enforcement actions in a manner consistent with due process. If they refuse, they are behaving no differently than home invaders or kidnappers.
If Bloomington, Indiana, has publicized such policies, I can’t find them on the city’s website. But, I have found an excellent statement of such policies on another Bloomington website — the website of the city of Bloomington, Minnesota. Their Immigration FAQ is exemplary. It contains questions about whether that department enforces immigration law, all followed by “No” combined with brief explanations, and links to immigrant rights legal resources. And it leads with a very reassuring 7-minute video from that Bloomington’s chief of police in both English and Spanish.
I appreciate the constraints under which our Bloomington is operating. Indiana is not Minnesota, and Mike Braun is not Gov. Tim Walz. At the same time, our city’s respect for “the bounds of the law” requires it to clarify its policies and procedures publicly. The alternative is simply to stand down and stand by while the Trump administration continues its relentless assault on civil liberties.
Jeffrey C. Issac is James H. Rudy professor of political science at Indiana University. The views expressed are those of the author only and should not be attributed to Indiana University.
This article originally appeared on The Herald-Times: What are Bloomington’s law enforcement policies on immigration? | OPINION
Reporting by Jeffrey C. Issac / The Herald-Times
USA TODAY Network via Reuters Connect
