Milwaukee officials, advocates working to verify viral report of Puerto Rican family detained by ICE
Elected officials and immigration rights groups say they are working to authenticate the incident but have few details to go on. ICE did not respond to requests for comment on Thursday.
Telemundo Puerto Rico reported a Puerto Rican mother, her three-year-old son and mother-in-law were taken into custody by ICE while shopping at an unnamed store in Milwaukee on Jan. 24.
According to the TV station's report, ICE bused the family and several other Spanish-speakers from the store to an unidentified detention center, according to the TV station's report. Telemundo aired a live audio interview with the mother, who was not named.
Puerto Ricans are U.S. citizens.
Sheriff's offices in Milwaukee County, Waukesha County, Sheboygan County and Kenosha County said they had no record of the family being detained in their jails.
"It should also be noted that we would not house a 3-year-old in our facility under any circumstances," said Amy Tesch with the Waukesha County Sheriff's Department in an email Thursday.
Telemundo's report erupted online. U.S. Rep. Gwen Moore, U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and thousands more shared Telemundo's report on social media.
Moore told the Journal Sentinel she's still gathering information about the incident but hasn't been able to verify it.
"However, regardless of its validity, many of my constituents are concerned about mass deportation efforts," Moore said in a text message Thursday.
Ald. Jose Perez says his office is also working to authenticate the incident.
"Any time an allegation occurs in Milwaukee, I will exhaust every resource I have to verify it for accuracy and respond," Perez said in an email Thursday.
Local immigrants' rights groups like Forward Latino and Voces De La Frontera are also looking into the report.
In general, advocates have asked community members to refrain from sharing unverified information to avoid causing unnecessary panic and distress. Since President Donald Trump took office, there have been several false reports of ICE raids in Wisconsin.
Forward Latino said on Facebook Thursday that it debunked "numerous reports" of ICE operations at Latino-owned businesses in the south side. The group identified two Facebook accounts that are intentionally spreading false information about ICE activity in Wisconsin, according to Darryl Morin, president of Forward Latino.
"It is having an impact on our business community," Morin said.
The false rumors of ICE raids combined with real instances of raids and U.S. citizens being detained are only causing confusion and doubling the immigrant community's fears, said Voces De La Frontera spokesperson Alexandra Guevara.
In New Jersey, a Puerto Rican veteran was among the people detained by ICE during a raid at a seafood store last week. And Thursday, the owners of Boricua 2, a Puerto Rican restaurant in Philadelphia, said ICE came to their business under the false impression that Puerto Ricans could be undocumented.
"While we can't confirm whether it's happening here, it's happening elsewhere," Guevara said.
Gina Lee Castro is a Public Investigator reporter for the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. Contact her at gcastro@gannett.com.
This article originally appeared on Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: Report of ICE detaining Puerto Rican family in Milwaukee draws concern
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
38 minutes ago
Appeals court upholds restrictions on Los Angeles immigration arrests
An appeals court upheld a lower court's order to temporarily block federal immigration agents from conducting immigration-related arrests in Los Angeles without probable cause. In the ruling on Friday night, the ninth circuit court of appeals agreed with a federal judge that immigration agents cannot use race, ethnicity or other factors, including speaking Spanish or speaking English with an accent, as the basis for reasonable suspicion to stop people. 'We agree with the district court that, in the context of the Central District of California, the four enumerated factors at issue -- apparent race, ethnicity, speaking Spanish or speaking English with an accent, particular location and type of work, even when considered together -- describe only a broad profile and do not demonstrate reasonable suspicion for any particular stop,' the three judge panel said. The appeals court found that the Trump administration did not dispute in filings that definitive stops in Los Angeles have occurred based on the factors and did not dispute the district court's conclusion that the reliance on them 'does not satisfy the constitutional requirement of reasonable suspicion.' The judges concluded that plaintiffs 'are likely to succeed' in showing that the Trump administration stopped and detained people based on their race, place of work and language. Last month, immigrant advocacy groups filed a lawsuit accusing the Trump administration of unconstitutional sweeps in Los Angeles. A hearing in the case is scheduled for September.
CNBC
an hour ago
- CNBC
Appeals court keeps order blocking Trump administration from indiscriminate immigration sweeps
A federal appeals court ruled Friday night to uphold a lower court's temporary order blocking the Trump administration from conducting indiscriminate immigration stops and arrests in Southern California. A three-judge panel of the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals held a hearing Monday afternoon at which the federal government asked the court to overturn a temporary restraining order issued July 12 by Judge Maame E. Frimpong, arguing it hindered their enforcement of immigration law. Immigrant advocacy groups filed suit last month accusing President Donald Trump's administration of systematically targeting brown-skinned people in Southern California during the administration's crackdown on illegal immigration. The lawsuit included three detained immigrants and two U.S. citizens as plaintiffs. In her order, Frimpong said there was a "mountain of evidence" that federal immigration enforcement tactics were violating the Constitution. She wrote the government cannot use factors such as apparent race or ethnicity, speaking Spanish or English with an accent, presence at a location such as a tow yard or car wash, or someone's occupation as the only basis for reasonable suspicion to detain someone. The appeals court panel agreed and questioned the government's need to oppose an order preventing them from violating the constitution. "If, as Defendants suggest, they are not conducting stops that lack reasonable suspicion, they can hardly claim to be irreparably harmed by an injunction aimed at preventing a subset of stops not supported by reasonable suspicion," the judges wrote. A hearing for a preliminary injunction, which would be a more substantial court order as the lawsuit proceeds, is scheduled for September. The Los Angeles region has been a battleground with the Trump administration over its aggressive immigration strategy that spurred protests and the deployment of the National Guard and Marines for several weeks. Federal agents have rounded up immigrants without legal status to be in the U.S. from Home Depots, car washes, bus stops, and farms, many of whom have lived in the country for decades. Among the plaintiffs is Los Angeles resident Brian Gavidia, who was shown in a video taken by a friend on June 13 being seized by federal agents as he yells, "I was born here in the states, East LA bro!" They want to "send us back to a world where a U.S. citizen ... can be grabbed, slammed against a fence and have his phone and ID taken from him just because he was working at a tow yard in a Latino neighborhood," American Civil Liberties Union attorney Mohammad Tajsar told the court Monday. The federal government argued that it hadn't been given enough time to collect and present evidence in the lawsuit, given that it was filed shortly before the July 4 holiday and a hearing was held the following week. "It's a very serious thing to say that multiple federal government agencies have a policy of violating the Constitution," attorney Jacob Roth said. He also argued that the lower court's order was too broad, and that immigrant advocates did not present enough evidence to prove that the government had an official policy of stopping people without reasonable suspicion. He referred to the four factors of race, language, presence at a location, and occupation that were listed in the temporary restraining order, saying the court should not be able to ban the government from using them at all. He also argued that the order was unclear on what exactly is permissible under law. "Legally, I think it's appropriate to use the factors for reasonable suspicion," Roth said The judges sharply questioned the government over their arguments. "No one has suggested that you cannot consider these factors at all," Judge Jennifer Sung said. However, those factors alone only form a "broad profile" and don't satisfy the reasonable suspicion standard to stop someone, she said. Sung, a Biden appointee, said that in an area like Los Angeles, where Latinos make up as much as half the population, those factors "cannot possibly weed out those who have undocumented status and those who have documented legal status." She also asked: "What is the harm to being told not to do something that you claim you're already not doing?" Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass called the Friday night decision a "victory for the rule of law" and said the city will protect residents from the "racial profiling and other illegal tactics" used by federal agents.
CBS News
an hour ago
- CBS News
Appeals court largely keeps restrictions on immigration raids in Los Angeles area
An appeals court late Friday mostly kept in place restrictions on "roving" immigration raids in the Los Angeles area, agreeing with a lower court judge who found that sweeps conducted by the Trump administration in Southern California appeared to have been predicated on people's race and other factors, like speaking Spanish. A panel of judges at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit largely denied a Trump administration request to suspend the lower court ruling, which required federal immigration officials to have reasonable suspicion that someone is in the country illegally before detaining them. The immigration raids at the center of the legal battle triggered massive protests in the Los Angeles area in June, as well as widespread fears among the region's large Latino community. While most demonstrations were peaceful, instances of violence led President Trump to deploy National Guard troops and U.S. Marines to Los Angeles with orders to protect federal buildings and the immigration agents enforcing his far-reaching crackdown on illegal immigration. Most of them have since been demobilized. Those high-profile immigration arrests in California have continued, led by Customs and Border Protection agents who have been assigned to help Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers with furthering the Trump administration's mass deportation campaign — in some cases, far away from the U.S.-Mexico border. Beyond requiring CBP and ICE to have reasonable suspicion before detaining someone, the July order from U.S. District Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong prohibited federal agents from basing arrests on people's race or ethnicity, the fact that they speak Spanish or have an accent, their presence in a location, or their occupation. Frimpong stated that any immigration arrests that relied exclusively on these factors violated the U.S. Constitution's 4th Amendment, which protects individuals from unreasonable searches and seizures. "We agree with the district court that, in the context of the Central District of California, the four enumerated factors at issue — apparent race or ethnicity, speaking Spanish or speaking English with an accent, particular location, and type of work, even when considered together — describe only a broad profile and 'do not demonstrate reasonable suspicion for any particular stop,'" the 9th Circuit panel wrote in its opinion Friday. The panel was comprised of Circuit Judges Ronald M. Gould, Marsha S. Berzon, and Jennifer Sung, appointees of former Presidents Bill Clinton and Joe Biden. The cases cited in the lawsuit against the Los Angeles-area immigration sweeps involved arrests in June near a car wash, a tow yard and other locations where U.S. citizens were among those questioned about their legal status and detained by federal agents. Advocates have described the operations as "roving patrols." The 9th Circuit did alter one part of Frimpong's ruling, removing an exception to her ban on using the four factors that include people's race and vocation when making arrests. The panel said that an "except as permitted by law" clause in her order was too vague. Pro-immigrants advocates hailed Friday's ruling, denouncing the Trump administration's immigration sweeps as indiscriminate raids that have instilled fear in the Los Angeles area. "Every person, regardless of immigration status, has the right to live, work, and belong in their community without being hunted, harassed, or locked away," said Lindsay Toczylowski, president of the Immigrant Defenders Law Center, a Los Angeles-based group that represents those facing deportation. The Trump administration has maintained in court that federal officials rely on intelligence packages and certain information — like "past experiences" that immigrants living in the U.S. illegally frequent or work at certain locations — when carrying out immigration enforcement operations. CBS News reached out to representatives for the Department of Homeland Security, which oversees ICE and CBP, to request comment on Friday's order.
