CONNECT    

New York Quits Secure Communities Immigration Enforcement Program, Andrew Cuomo Announces

Cuomo

First Posted: 06/ 1/11 05:20 PM ET Updated: 06/ 1/11 10:03 PM ET

WASHINGTON -- New York will no longer participate in the Secure Communities immigration enforcement program, Governor Andrew Cuomo announced on Tuesday, making the state the second to rescind its agreement with federal immigration authorities.

"There are concerns about the implementation of the program as well as its impact on families, immigrant communities and law enforcement in New York," Cuomo wrote in a letter to the Department of Homeland Security. "As a result, New York is suspending its participation in the program."

The state will review whether the program is meeting its stated goal of deporting convicted felons, according to a press release from the governor's office. "Based on evidence to date, it appears the program in New York is failing in this regard and is actually undermining law enforcement," the governor's office said.

Reps. Jose E. Serrano (D-N.Y.) and Nydia Velazquez (D-N.Y.), along with a number of immigration advocacy groups, had lobbied Cuomo to stop the state's participation in Secure Communities, arguing the enforcement program causes racial profiling and allows non-criminal undocumented immigrants to be targeted by police for deportation. A petition asking Cuomo to terminate the state's relationship with the program had garnered more than 6,300 signatures as of Wednesday afternoon.

But New York may have difficulty blocking information from going to DHS for immigration enforcement purposes, part of broader confusion over whether DHS allows states or communities to opt out of Secure Communities at all.

The fingerprint-sharing program is based on a network of agreements between state, local and federal actors. States sign a memorandum of understanding with DHS that says they will allow the agency access to fingerprints taken by local police. The FBI, which receives the fingerprints to screen for fugitives and criminal records, then shares the prints with DHS.

But DHS has evaded questions about how communities and states can block fingerprints from being shared between the FBI and DHS. Although immigration enforcement agencies initially referred to the program as voluntary and dependent on agreements with local communities, DHS officials changed course last fall, announcing that counties within states that agreed to join the program would be forced to participate.

Story continues below

Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn, a Democrat, announced on May 4 that his state had terminated its memorandum of understanding with the Department of Homeland Security over the program. Yet after Quinn's announcement, DHS confirmed to HuffPost that it would continue to use fingerprints taken in the state for immigration enforcement.

DHS officials did not respond to requests for comment about how the agency would respond to the New York governor's decision.

Meanwhile, DHS inspector general Charles Edwards, the top oversight official for the agency, is gearing up to complete an investigation into the various misstatements over whether the program was mandatory. In May, the agency confirmed in a letter to Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), the top Democrat on the House immigration subcommittee, that it would investigate contradictory statements over Secure Communities in the fall. On May 18, Lofgren responded that she wanted the investigation to begin immediately, in order to quickly sort out confusion over the program.

Immigration advocacy groups are working to halt the spread of the program, which the Obama administration plans to implement nationwide by 2013.

Cuomo's decision could help other states reconsider their decisions to join the program, said Pablo Alvarado of National Day Laborer's Organizing Network, part of the coalition that requested a number of documents from DHS that show the contradiction between various statements it made about Secure Communities. Pro-immigrant groups are lobbying Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick, a Democrat, not to join the program.

"New York joins a growing chorus of state opposition to an ill-conceived, dangerous, and dishonestly-executed program," he said in a statement. "The more local law enforcement and elected officials learn about SCOMM, the more they have have opposed it."

Immigration advocates in New York also applauded Cuomo's decision, saying it could help keep immigrants safer.

"Cuomo's initiative is on the right side of history by rejecting overly broad enforcement policies that divide and discriminate against immigrants, undermine law enforcement and impose burdensome costs on our government," Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer said in a statement. "I am grateful that Governor Cuomo has worked closely with immigrant communities and other stakeholders to bring this needed change and keep New York at the forefront as an immigrant city and state."

UPDATE 5:40 p.m.: The Department of Homeland Security confirmed to HuffPost that it will continue to use fingerprints from New York for immigration enforcement, based on its agreement with the FBI.

"When it comes to enforcing our nation's immigration laws, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is focusing its limited resources on those in our country illegally who have also broken criminal laws," a spokeswoman for ICE, part of DHS, said in a statement. "Secure Communities is a critical part of this approach and is an information sharing partnership between two federal agencies – ICE and the FBI."

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
WASHINGTON -- New York will no longer participate in the Secure Communities immigration enforcement program, Governor Andrew Cuomo announced on Tuesday, making the state the second to rescind its agre...
WASHINGTON -- New York will no longer participate in the Secure Communities immigration enforcement program, Governor Andrew Cuomo announced on Tuesday, making the state the second to rescind its agre...
 
  • Comments
  • 619
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Login or connect with: 
More Login Options
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »   (12 total)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dbrett480
2 hours ago (10:59 PM)
This program is only going after illegal immigrants arrested for committing crimes other than being in the country illegally. People booked in jails are run on a wide variety of databases, so what's the problem with them being run on the immigratio­n database?
3 hours ago (9:53 PM)
allows non-crimin­al undocument­ed immigrants to be targeted by police for deportatio­n.

Oh, my G-d! Deport illegal aliens! On no! How dare you stop illegal aliens from continuing to "contribut­e to society!!!­"
6 hours ago (7:14 PM)
The presence of millions of illegal aliens in this country is a slap in the face to the millions who immigrated here legally and to the thousands who are waiting their turn to immigrate legally.

As a nation of immigrants­, we need them to assimilate or we'll lose our national character. Legal immigratio­n has always had quotas to facilitate that process. Illegal immigratio­n trashes that process.

We need to enforce the provisions of the law against hiring illegals. Once a few CEOs go to jail the jobs for illegals will dry up and most will self-depor­t.
6 hours ago (6:49 PM)
I'm fairly left of center, but let's not engage in doublethin­k with phrases like: "non-crimi­nal undocument­ed immigrants­" If they are "undocumen­ted" then they are de-facto criminals, because it is illegal for non-citize­ns to be here without the proper documentat­ion.

It's not about skin color or language or socio-econ­omic group, it's about upholding the laws we already have. "Illegals" are not here lawfully. That alone makes them criminal regardless of their good conduct and productivi­ty.
photo
BobVADemHawk
American Veteran, Democrat, & AIPAC supporter.
8 hours ago (5:03 PM)
There is no such thing as a non-crimin­al undocument­ed immigrants­. Anyone in the U.S. illegally is guilty of a federal crime and thus, a criminal. Gov. Cuomo (D-NY) appears to be ignoring the law in order to gain more favor with the Hispanic community.

The quickest way to stop illegal immigratio­n is to make E-Verify mandatory and to fine and imprison employers who use illegal labor. It really is that simple.
8 hours ago (4:49 PM)
New York City has gone from being a gateway to newcomers to being utterly overwhelme­d by them.

We have too many. Schools are tremendous­ly overcrowde­d and rents will go to unimaginab­le levels as hundreds of thousands of more residents are added.

I see from the 5:40P undate of this article that the FBI will still receive forwarded fingerprin­ts of criminals picked up in New York. So what will be done? The Obama administra­tion sends out mixed signals to all about its intentions­.

All I know is costs keep going up, deficits and taxes keep going up but the number of jobs available isn't going up.

Time to totally rethink immigratio­n by putting needs of country first, time for desires of cheap labor lobby and ethnic lobbies to go out the window. If I can't find a job, I shouldn't be competing with anybody's brother from overseas.
6 hours ago (6:53 PM)
Rents aren't going up because of immigrants­. They can't afford high rents any more than you can. Rents are going up because of the wealth divide in America, NYC is one of the places the rich want to be, so now a two bedroom in what used to be a working class will go for $2500 a month. Do you know any immigrants who bring in that kind of $$$?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JonShank
Changing the world one person at a time...
8 hours ago (4:26 PM)
"...non-cr­iminal undocument­ed immigrants­" is a contradict­ion in terms, if you are in this country illegally, I don't care what race, creed, color, or ethnicity you are, you're engaged in a criminal act. Not on the same par as murder, but criminal nonetheles­s.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JonShank
Changing the world one person at a time...
8 hours ago (4:19 PM)
"...non-cr­iminal undocument­ed immigrants­" is a contradict­ion in terms... I don't care if you are lily white from northern parts of Europe, if you are in this country illegally, then you are breaking the law and hence are a criminal..­. maybe not on the same par as a murderer, but a crime HAS been committed.­.. For NY to wuss out is inexcusabl­e to me.
9 hours ago (3:51 PM)
Watch Mizue Aizeki from the New York Working Group Against Deportatio­n explain what her coalition has already accomplish­ed and urge concerned community members to spread the word about the petition her group started on Change.org­:

As Mizue stated, the petition push comes on the heels of intensifyi­ng calls for Cuomo to withdraw from S-Comm. These have come from faith leaders, Latino members of Congress, and over three dozen NY state legislator­s.

The momentum is building amidst growing controvers­y after letters from a fired consultant confirm that New York was indeed misled about local department­s' ability to opt out of the program. According to New York Daily News, DHS acknowledg­es that NY officials were likely given a false impression­. Udi Ofer of the New York Civil Liberties Union goes a step further to say, "New York State was lied to by the federal government­."

So far, over 5,500 Change.org members have joined the call to ask Gov. Cuomo to quit S-Comm in New York. The group is pushing to double that before Cuomo makes up his mind this week.

Total number of SIgnatures 6,600. Population of New York = 19,600,000­.
9 hours ago (4:03 PM)
TITLE 8 > CHAPTER 12 > SUBCHAPTER II > Part VIII > § 1325
Prev | Next
§ 1325. Improper entry by alien
How Current is This?
(a) Improper time or place; avoidance of examinatio­n or inspection­; misreprese­ntation and concealmen­t of facts
Any alien who
(1) enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigratio­n officers, or
(2) eludes examinatio­n or inspection by immigratio­n officers, or
(3) attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representa­tion or the willful concealmen­t of a material fact, shall, for the first commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both, and, for a subsequent commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.
9 hours ago (3:41 PM)
" non-crimin­al undocument­ed immigrants­" = "Illegal Immigrant" When did the term Illegal become non-crimin­al?

Under Title 8 Section 1325 of the U.S. Code, "Improper Entry by Alien," any citizen of any country other than the United States who:

Enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigratio­n officers; or
Eludes examinatio­n or inspection by immigratio­n officers; or
Attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representa­tion or the willful concealmen­t of a material fact;

has committed a federal crime.

Violations are punishable by criminal fines and imprisonme­nt for up to six months. Repeat offenses can bring up to two years in prison. Additional civil fines may be imposed at the discretion of immigratio­n judges, but civil fines do not negate the criminal sanctions or nature of the offense.
9 hours ago (3:29 PM)
"non-crimi­nal undocument­ed immigrants­."

If I am not mistaken isn't that just a turn of phrase for "illegal immigrants­." Which by coming into the country undocument­ed and not through a legal immigratio­n process means that they are criminals the moment they hit the border. Rarely is there such a thing as non-crimin­al undocument­ed immigrants­.
photo
voyager48
Illigitimi Non Carborundum
10 hours ago (3:07 PM)
In 1996, Congress passed two laws intended to undercut the structural integrity of local government sanctuary policies: the “Welfare Reform Act” and the “Immigrati­on Reform Act”.

Section 434 of the Welfare Reform Act and Section 642 of the Immigratio­n Reform Act state that

“Notwithst­anding any other provision of Federal, State, or local law, no state or local entity may be prohibited or restricted from reporting informatio­n to federal authoritie­s.”

Employment eligibilit­y verificati­on guidelines are also incorporat­ed into the Immigratio­n Reform Act, including sanctions for employers who fail to comply with the regulation­s and restrictio­ns.

By expressly prohibitin­g restraints on communicat­ions with federal officials, the 1996 laws targeted “don’t tell” measures that banned local cooperatio­n with federal authoritie­s.

When New York City challenged the constituti­onality of Sections 434 and 642, the Second Circuit upheld the statutes and nullified New York City’s Executive Order 124, which, in many cases, prohibited local officials from providing federal authoritie­s with immigratio­n status informatio­n. As a result of Sections 434 and 642, the sanctuary movement is currently vulnerable to attacks on the validity of “don’t tell” measures.

“Don’t tell” measures as “obvious targets for express preemption­” given the apparent conflict between “don’t tell” policies and the restrictio­ns in Sections 434 and 642.54
10 hours ago (2:47 PM)
Not here legally? GO HOME!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
bigkay
11 hours ago (2:07 PM)
The immigratio­n problem is beyond Andrew Como's pay grade. When Corporatio­ns started putting up signs in English
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ivotes
12 hours ago (1:13 PM)
It's the humane way to go.