We warned you that the federal government had gotten into the snake-oil business with Secure Communities (S-Comm). Turns out that the actual purpose of S-Comm was just part of the story. The federal government also misled state and local governments, as well as the public, about whether or not the program was voluntary. Federal judge Shira A. Scheindlin ordered the release of the hundreds of internal S-Comm documents, remarking,

“… ICE [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] and DHS [Department of Homeland Security] have gone out of their way to mislead the public about Secure Communities. In particular, these agencies have failed to acknowledge a shift in policy when it is patently obvious -– from public documents and statements –- that there has been one.”

The documents show government officials doing back flips to avoid answering a simple question: is S-Comm participation mandatory for local governments? In one email released under the judge’s order, an S-Comm employee criticized the public message around Secure Communities:

“We never address whether or not it is mandatory –- the answer is written to sound like it is but doesn’t state it… It’s very convoluted –- or is that the point?”

Whether the program is mandatory or not became a critical question when more and more local governments began to opt out of the program.
Now, of course, the federal government has finally come clean: it doesn't actually care that S-Comm undermines the public's trust in local law enforcement, or that local governments across the country reject S-Comm. The federal government negotiated agreements with governors across the country to authorize states’ participation in S-Comm, which would lead one to believe that states had a choice whether to participate.
The Obama administration has now voided those agreements, as it prepares to implement S-Comm in every city, county, and state in the nation by 2013.
Unless we take action. Tell the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors to oppose S-Comm by only referring to immigration authorities those who pose a threat to our communities.
Hector Villagra is the Executive Director of the ACLU/SC.

 

Fullerton has started to get it right.  The city has hired an independent consultant to investigate the death of Kelly Thomas.  This decision shows the city understands that the investigation must not only be independent but also go beyond -- far beyond -- potential criminality. It needs, for instance, to address how the police department trains officers to identify and deal with mentally ill and homeless persons, and how it investigates instances of alleged excessive force.  Many questions need to be answered, and we hope and expect that the independent investigator will be vested with the full authority and resources to answer them.
The investigation of police conduct is fundamentally about public accountability.  The citizens of Fullerton have vested their police officers with the power to carry and use weapons and to employ deadly force in their service to society.  But the citizens must trust that their officers will use that power responsibly, and that trust -- maintaining that trust -- requires a meaningful system of accountability.
So, if Fullerton wants to get it completely right, it should establish a civilian review board.  A full and independent investigation should occur as a matter of course in cases like this; it should not depend on the public outcry or the request of a city official.  Citizens are entitled to an ongoing mechanism to oversee police practices, not just a one-time response to a high profile incident.
Hector Villagra is the Executive Director of the ACLU/SC.

A comprehensive report released today by the ACLU of California and sent to officials in every county across the state urges local jurisdictions to fundamentally shift criminal justice policies toward “smart-on-crime” alternatives to incarceration. The new report, Community Safety, Community Solutions, offers guidelines and tools for county governments scrambling to implement the Governor’s new public safety realignment legislation, AB 109. The bill requires counties to take on new responsibilities for low-level non-violent offenders. Those inmates will no longer be sent to state prison beginning October 1.

This public safety realignment, intended to improve public safety and ease severe prison overcrowding while saving the state money, comes at a time when California is facing unprecedented challenges. State and local governments continue to struggle to close record budget deficits, making deep cuts in core programs including public safety, education and social services. The U.S. Supreme Court has ordered the state to take immediate action to address its unconstitutionally overcrowded prison system, so overburdened that it is jeopardizing the health and safety of inmates and staff alike.

The state is counting on AB 109 realignment to reduce the prison population by more than 30,000; most of those sentenced after October 1 for non-serious non-violent, non-sex offense felonies will be subject to local jail custody or alternatives to incarceration rather than being sent to state prison. AB 109 instructs county governments to utilize evidence-based alternatives, such as drug treatment, mental health services, job training and educational programs, all shown to reduce recidivism and cost less than jail time.

“High rates of recidivism mean more new crimes and more new victims,” said Hector Villagra, Executive Director of the ACLU of Southern California. “We have to hold individuals accountable for their behavior while addressing the underlying reasons that currently lead so many low-level offenders right back to prison and jail.”

AB 109 requires each county to develop its own implementation plan. The ACLU report proposes a 12-step plan to counties for successful realignment planning and implementation to control costs and maximize the potential benefits of AB 109. The 12 step plan includes urging counties to adopt new programs like pre-arrest diversion and to revamp immigration enforcement policies to reduce costs and lower jail populations.

According to the ACLU, AB 109 realignment is a step in the right direction but will not be enough to solve California’s over-incarceration problem. In addition to its 12 step plan for counties, the ACLU is calling for meaningful state-wide sentencing reform including the reduction of low-level drug and property crimes from felonies to misdemeanors, and for a state sentencing commission to evaluate and reform California sentencing policies.