Recently it was reported that the hotel chain Motel 6 gave guest information of more than 80,000 guests to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (I.C.E.). This was done without a warrant and Hispanic/Latinx sounding names were flagged. As someone who has Latinx family and friends, and as someone who actually cares about the Constitution, this deeply disturbs me. Constitutional troubles and instances of unprofessionalism run deep with I.C.E.; it has actually alienated lower law enforcement and federal agencies from wanting to work with them in capacities beyond immigration.
Anyone familiar with the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution which states “no illegal searches and seizures” knows about the importance of warrants for search or arrest. Warrants are a law enforcement agency attempting to establish a connection between a person and a crime and relaying all their suspicions on paper. A judge then reviews the warrant and can either give it back due to lack of evidence or if it is questionable, or approve it by signing. The form I-200 states it is a so called “warrant,” but when you look at it closer, there is no spot for a judge to sign off on, just an “authorized immigration officer.” Many experts and some federal courts question the legal weight of these forms. They are a “detainer” masked as a “warrant.” A detainer is a form asking someone to be detained for 48 hours until an investigation is concluded and often means the issuer of the detainer lacks sufficient evidence to meet the burden of proof. Since they are not signed by a judge, local police are not obligated to assist I.C.E. Judges being involved in the process of search and seizure warrants is a check on the power of police and holds them accountable. Circumnavigating the Fourth Amendment is most certainly a chilling, but common practice of I.C.E.
Speaking of courts, I.C.E. has been acting like sharks awaiting minnows outside of local courthouses, often seizing people they suspect of being undocumented even if they are not. This ends up pissing off judges and sheriffs because I.C.E. detains these people without informing them beforehand. I.C.E. will often do this while judges are in the middle of ongoing criminal or civil proceedings. North Carolina is currently proposing a bill that fines sheriffs every day for not complying with I.C.E. detainment orders. The sheriff of Mecklenburg County spoke vehemently against I.C.E. bully tactics to a legislative committee testifying that ICE “was not following the rules.” In Wisconsin local law enforcement was never informed or given follow up info regarding an I.C.E. raid that arrested 40 persons six months ago. My issues with I.C.E. are not just moral, but also practical. Their bully tactics have alienated local law enforcement from wanting to cooperate with other federal agencies on important national and transnational issues like wildlife contraband, drug trafficking, human trafficking, illegal weapons and cyber crimes. It’s quite ironic their parent department, Homeland Security, was literally established to foster more interagency cooperation on law enforcement and emergency response post 9/11, but I.C.E. is doing the exact opposite of that. I could go on about the practical issues I have with I.C.E. organizationally and not just the moral issues I have with it. This agency needs a tighter leash around it because it’s clear it doesn’t want to play by the rules, it just wants to bully immigrants and other law enforcement agencies. At best it should have more oversight, at worst it should be abolished.
Jackson Beckerley, a Contributing Writer for the Voice, can be reached for comment at JBeckerley21@wooster.edu.