Latest news with #LD1971
Yahoo
24-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Maine Legislature passes restrictions on federal immigration enforcement
A member of U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement apprehends a suspect. (Photo via U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement) This story was updated following Senate action and enactment votes. Both chambers of the Maine Legislature approved a bill to restrict local authorities from carrying out federal immigration enforcement. After about three hours total of debate across chambers, the Senate voted 21-14 for passage on Tuesday, following the House of Representatives that approved it earlier by one vote. Both chambers enacted the bill on Wednesday, sending it to the governor. Meanwhile, both chambers on Tuesday rejected a competing proposal that would prevent local agencies from adopting any policies that restrict them from assisting in such enforcement. During both the House and Senate debate, Republican legislators argued restricting local police from collaborating with federal authorities on immigration matters would make Maine a 'sanctuary state,' putting a target on Maine in light of President Donald Trump threatening to withhold federal funding from and conduct immigration raids in so-called sanctuary jurisdictions. Meanwhile, Democrats argued the bill would do no such thing. Rather, they said, adding such restrictions is necessary to ensure the rule of law is upheld since the Trump administration has violated legal norms and ignored court orders in a mass push to remove noncitizens. LD 1971, the bill the House advanced, passed with a 74-73 vote. It would place restrictions on some immigration enforcement activities, but it is more limited in scope than originally proposed. Effort to restrict Maine police from carrying out federal immigration enforcement splits lawmakers After law enforcement authorities raised concern about the proposal hindering federal partnerships that sometimes touch on some immigration issues, such as drug enforcement task forces, the amended version clarifies that only work done by local police for the primary purpose of immigration enforcement would be banned. 'This bill does not prevent Maine law enforcement agencies from doing their job,' bill sponsor Rep. Deqa Dhalac (D-South Portland) said on the floor, pointing out that immigration enforcement is an authority generally reserved to federal authorities. 'Instead, it provides clarity. Especially, it will ensure that Maine law enforcement can focus on their primary mission, safeguarding our communities and upholding the state laws.' Consideration of these restrictions comes amid state and national scrutiny of immigration enforcement. Trump announced late Sunday that he was directing ICE officers to conduct immigration raids in New York, Los Angeles and Chicago, the nation's three most populous cities that are all led by elected Democrats in heavily Democratic states. 'I want ICE, Border Patrol, and our Great and Patriotic Law Enforcement Officers, to FOCUS on our crime ridden and deadly Inner Cities, and those places where Sanctuary Cities play such a big role,' Trump wrote on social media, referring to cities that don't coordinate with federal immigration officials for civil enforcement. The announcement escalates a week-long conflict in Los Angeles, where large protests started after immigration officials began arresting people at work sites across the city. Trump directed 4,000 National Guard troops and 700 Marines to L.A. amid the protests without California Gov. Gavin Newsom's consent. 'I never imagined that I would be standing here questioning whether the state of Maine should regulate when and how our police officers interact with their federal counterparts,' Rep. Tavis Rock Hasenfus (D-Augusta) said on the floor. Hasenfus went on, 'But nor could I have imagined that I'd be living in a country where federal agents would appear in our communities in unmarked vans and masks, executing orders without question, simply to meet arbitrary quotas. Nor did I imagine a time when our federal government would so routinely ignore lawful court orders instructing them to abide by basic constitutional principles.' Pointing to other injustices in the nation's history, Rep. Victoria Doudera (D-Camden) argued that some of the Trump administration's actions are in line with that legacy. 'I think it's been all too American in our past,' Doudera said, 'but I think it represents the worst of what America is and we need to stand up in this Legislature and be for the best that America has.' Others praised the Trump administration on immigration enforcement. 'We should not stand in their way when they come into our great state to do their job and arrest these criminals,' said Rep. Michael Soboleski (R-Phillips). Soboleski is the sponsor of the immigration bill the Legislature rejected, LD 1656, which would prevent local agencies from adopting any policies that restrict them from assisting in the enforcement of federal immigration law. After the House voted against passage 77-71, the Senate followed suit with a 20-14 vote against it. 'This legislation is a critical step towards ensuring that Maine remains a law-abiding partner with federal government particularly,' Rep. Jennifer Poirier (R-Skowhegan) said of LD 1656. 'In the realm of immigration enforcement, the Trump administration has made it clear that states and localities that impede federal immigration enforcement risk losing significant federal funding.' Wells Police pauses ICE agreement in light of pending legislation that would ban it In an executive order in late April, Trump threatened to withhold federal funding from so-called sanctuary jurisdictions, a move a judge has since blocked. In the Senate Tuesday night, Assistant Minority Leader Matthew Harrington (R-York), a 17-year veteran of law enforcement and current reserve police officer for the Kennebunk Police Department, said that he has personally detained suspects for federal immigration authorities under multiple administrations. 'This is nothing new to our state,' Harrington said, 'but this bill is going to handcuff law enforcement's ability to assist those agencies with those investigations.' Sen. Joe Baldacci (D-Penobscot) disagreed. 'In normal times, the arguments of my Republican friends might persuade me or influence me on this decision,' Baldacci said. 'But the fact of the matter is, we do not live in normal times. We actually have an administration that does not respect law, that runs roughshod over the law.' Representatives made similar points in the House earlier Tuesday. 'I say this as someone who has often been critical of my party's view on border security — this isn't about border security anymore. It's about cruelty,' Rep. Adam Lee (D-Auburn) said. Not all in the Democratic Party agreed. Rep. Dani O'Halloran (D-Brewer) argued, 'Criminal networks do not stop at city or state lines, and neither should our collaboration as law enforcement agencies.' But a violation of immigration law, the enforcement that LD 1971 seeks to ban, is a civil rather than criminal violation, Rep. Ellie Sato (D-Gorham) pointed out. In normal times, the arguments of my Republican friends might persuade me or influence me on this decision. But the fact of the matter is, we do not live in normal times. We actually have an administration that does not respect law, that runs roughshod over the law. – Sen. Joe Baldacci (D-Penobscot) Other legislators who voted against LD 1656 amplified concerns raised by the Maine Municipal Association during the bill's public hearing that municipalities would be on the hook to pay for their local police taking on federal immigration enforcement work, expanding their legal risk with no compensation 'For me, that is also terribly concerning,' said Rep. Amy J. Roeder (D-Bangor). In the upper chamber, it is also troubling to at least one senator from across the aisle. Sen. Rick Bennett (R-Oxford), who voted for LD 1971, said, 'I, for one, am concerned about the use of Maine resources and the taking of those resources for activities that are governed by whatever party is in the White House. We need to focus on Maine, and I believe that this amended version actually accomplishes that.' Concerns about these costs have been raised by residents in the town of Wells, whose police force became the only in Maine to enter into an agreement with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement under what's called the 287(g) program. After the 287(g) program was discontinued in 2012 due to the discovery of discriminatory practices such as racial profiling, Trump revived it to bolster ICE's capacity by deputizing local police officers to detain immigrants. But Wells Police Department has since paused its agreement to see if the Legislature votes to ban such contracts. On Friday, Wells residents submitted a petition to their town manager with more than 900 signatures calling for the department to permanently terminate the agreement. The Judiciary Committee opted to postpone until next year consideration of another bill, LD 1259, that seeks to explicitly prohibit these contracts, but LD 1971 would also have this effect. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
09-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Effort to restrict Maine police from carrying out federal immigration enforcement splits lawmakers
Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents arrest a fugitive in 2020. (Photo via U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement) A narrow majority of the Judiciary Committee recommended on Monday that the Legislature pass a bill to restrict local authorities from carrying out federal immigration enforcement. LD 1971 would place restrictions on enforcement activities absent formal agreements with federal authorities, and the version advanced was amended to clarify what would and would not be permitted under the bill as a means to address pushback from police groups. The vote was 7-6, with Passamaquoddy Tribal Rep. Aaron Dana absent. Those opposed — the Republicans on the committee and Democratic Rep. Dani O'Halloran of Brewer — raised objections, both to the bill's substance as well as the decision to take the vote on Monday. The vote came amid growing scrutiny of local law enforcement collaboration with federal immigration authorities and followed days of protests over the Trump administration's workplace raids in Los Angeles with residents and activists facing off with local and federal officers. Rep. Rachel Henderson (R-Rumford), who voted against the measure, said the bill would 'effectively turn Maine into a 'sanctuary state,'' and argued, 'we're actively seeing on a national level how that's playing out currently in California.' President Donald Trump has since deployed the National Guard to the protests, the first time a president has activated a state's National Guard since 1965 without a request from a governor — something Gov. Janet Mills and other Democratic governors condemned in a joint statement. California Gov. Gavin Newsom is now suing Trump over the deployment. Others on the committee asked for more time to consider the bill. Sen. David Haggan (R-Penobscot) requested another work session, but committee co-chair Sen. Anne Carney (D-Cumberland) said that the committee is already working past deadline. Rep. Jennifer Poirier (R-Skowhegan) also tried to push for more time by requesting the bill be carried over into next year, which is what the committee decided to do last week with a related proposal. The committee carried over LD 1259, which would explicitly prohibit state and local law enforcement agencies from entering into contracts with federal immigration enforcement authorities. Participation in U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's 287(g) program has grown across the country after President Donald Trump revived it to bolster ICE's capacity by deputizing local police officers to detain immigrants, an authority otherwise generally reserved to federal authorities. The program was discontinued in 2012 due to the discovery of discriminatory practices such as racial profiling. Wells Police Department is the only Maine agency that has opted to join. However, Wells paused its agreement to see if the Legislature votes to ban such contracts. The committee also voted down a competing plan, LD 1656, which would prevent local agencies from adopting any policies that restrict them from assisting in the enforcement of federal immigration law. Rep. Elizabeth Caruso (R-Caratunk) requested more time to hear from law enforcement on the latest changes to the bill. A few additional tweaks were made since last week when Auburn Police Chief Jason Moen, who is president of the Maine Chiefs of Police Association, said an earlier amendment assuaged his concerns 'to some extent.' The overarching concern from law enforcement has been about the bill hindering federal task forces that are not primarily for immigration enforcement but sometimes touch on some immigration issues, such as drug enforcement partnerships. Michael Kebede, policy director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Maine, said the version that passed on Monday was crafted to explicitly address those concerns but that law enforcement did not have a hand in drafting the amendment. 'I just don't feel like this is doing our due diligence,' Caruso said. But Rep. Adam Lee (D-Auburn) said, 'Respectfully, I couldn't disagree more.' Regarding the latest changes, he said, 'We've protected the one thing we've heard from the chiefs of police that is a problem.' The amended version clarifies that the legislation doesn't prohibit state or local law enforcement from conducting investigative and enforcement duties as part of a joint law enforcement task force,as long as its primary purpose is not immigration enforcement. Further, it removed provisions that would have prohibited state and local law enforcement agencies from providing office space for immigration authorities and prohibited state employees from inquiring about a person's immigration status unless necessary to determine service eligibility or ordered by law. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
04-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Proposed ban on ICE agreements pushed to next year as lawmakers consider other restrictions
An ICE officer coordinates with other officials during an enforcement operation in San Antonio, Texas on Feb. 5, 2025. (Photo via U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement) The Judiciary Committee pushed off deciding on whether to ban local law enforcement agreements with federal immigration authorities until next year. But the majority of its members voted against a conflicting proposal that would make it illegal to restrict compliance with immigration enforcement. These decisions were made on Wednesday as members ran back and forth between the committee room and their respective chambers amid a busy session day. The committee decided to carry over into next year LD 1259, which would explicitly prohibit state and local law enforcement agencies from entering into contracts with federal immigration enforcement authorities. On the other hand, a motion to pass LD 1656, which would prevent local agencies from adopting any policies that restrict them from assisting in the enforcement of federal immigration law, failed 4-8, with two members absent. This bill is sponsored by Rep. Michael Soboleski of Phillips and co-sponsored by nine other Republicans. However, the committee has yet to decide on LD 1971, which would place restrictions on enforcement activities absent formal agreements with federal authorities. The committee did discuss an amendment to clarify what would and would not be permitted under the bill as a means to address pushback from police groups. Auburn Police Chief Jason Moen, who is president of the Maine Chiefs of Police Association, raised concerns about the bill hindering federal task forces that are not primarily for immigration enforcement but sometimes touch on some immigration issues, such as drug enforcement partnerships. Moen said the proposed changes assuage those concerns 'to some extent.' Another work session on LD 1971 is scheduled for Monday. Immigration enforcement hearing highlights lack of protocol for local, federal collaboration Rep. Ambureen Rana (D-Bangor), who sponsored LD 1259, requested that the bill be carried over to next year, telling her colleagues Wednesday that she believes it is necessary but would benefit from more time to allow for greater community engagement and to study its implications before lawmakers vote. Participation in U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's 287(g) program has grown across the country after President Donald Trump revived it to bolster ICE's capacity by deputizing local police officers to detain immigrants, an authority otherwise generally reserved to federal authorities. The program was discontinued in 2012 due to the discovery of discriminatory practices such as racial profiling. Wells Police Department is the only Maine agency that has opted to join. However, Wells paused its agreement to see if the Legislature votes to ban such contracts. 'Some law enforcement officials expressed concerns about the bill's unintended impacts, which I take seriously,' Rana told Maine Morning Star after the vote. Noting that six states have laws or policies that prohibit participation, Rana said, 'Additional time in our legislative process allows us to study the impacts in those states while individual communities continue to advocate for municipalities that stand for the safety of all residents.' Wells residents have been voicing both support and opposition to their local police force contracting with ICE at Select Board meetings. Those calling for the police force to terminate the contract have collected more than 350 signatures. Monmouth Winthrop Police Department, a combination of departments that serve central Maine communities, also initially submitted an application to join the program but withdrew it after community pushback, with their Police Chief Paul Ferland citing the division it caused in the community as the main reason. 'Carrying the bill over keeps it alive while we continue to build support across the state,' Rana said. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
21-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Wells Police pauses ICE agreement in light of pending legislation that would ban it
Wells resident Beth Allen speaks in opposition to the Wells Police Department contract with ICE during a Select Board meeting on May 6. (By Emma Davis/ Maine Morning Star) The only Maine police department that has contracted with federal authorities to assist with immigration enforcement is pausing its agreement to see if the Maine Legislature votes to ban such contracts. Wells Police Chief Jo-Ann Putnam announced Tuesday night during a Select Board meeting that her department is adopting a 'wait-and-see approach' to credentialing its officers under U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's 287(g) program. 'This decision reflects the need to see how the legislation ends up playing out in Augusta,' Putnam said, referencing LD 1259, which had a public hearing on Monday. Two bills, LD 1259 and LD 1971, would prohibit state and local law enforcement agencies from carrying out the work of federal immigration authorities. LD 1259 would do so by explicitly prohibiting contracts with such authorities, while LD 1971 would place restrictions on enforcement activities absent formal agreements. Based on Putnam's brief comments at the meeting, it is unclear exactly what the pause means. Putnam could not be reached by the time of publication. In early May, she told Maine Morning Star that Wells officers had begun the training for the program, which is online. After the 287(g) program was discontinued in 2012 due to the discovery of discriminatory practices such as racial profiling, President Donald Trump revived it to bolster ICE's capacity by deputizing local police officers to detain immigrants, an authority otherwise generally reserved to federal authorities. Immigration enforcement hearing highlights lack of protocol for local, federal collaboration Putnam and Police Capt. Kevin Chabot previously told Maine Morning Star that they entered into the agreement to take advantage of a training opportunity and streamline work. On Tuesday night, Putnam said, 'I would like to reiterate one more time that at no point was there ever any intent on doing proactive immigration enforcement.' Wells remains the only local agency to have entered the program in Maine. Monmouth Winthrop Police Department, a combination of departments that serve central Maine communities, applied for the program but withdrew its application after community pushback. Community pushback in Wells is continuing in light of the pause. 'Our group, although appreciative of a pause, really is looking for Wells Police to withdraw from the contract,' Wells resident Peg Duddy told Maine Morning Star Wednesday morning. Duddy and other residents have been calling for termination of the agreement during Select Board meetings, including Tuesday night after Putnam announced the pause. The group has also been collecting signatures from Wells residents in favor of withdrawing and had more than 350 as of Wednesday morning, Duddy said. These residents have said they don't want their local force collaborating with an agency that has been accused of disregarding due process, for local police funding to go toward federal enforcement and possibly litigation, or for Wells to be known as an unwelcoming place for immigrants. However, other residents have commended local police for entering the federal partnership, showing that the matter has divided the community. The two bills heard on Monday come after Republican legislators presented a conflicting bill last month that would prevent local agencies from adopting any policies that restrict them from assisting in the enforcement of federal immigration law. None of these bills have received votes yet and there is only a month left until lawmakers are expected to conclude their work for the first year of Maine's two-year legislative session. One of the bill sponsors, Rep. Ambureen Rana (D-Bangor), told Maine Morning Star that the intention is for the Legislature to make its decisions on the issue this year. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
20-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Immigration enforcement hearing highlights lack of protocol for local, federal collaboration
Rep. Deqa Dhalac (D-South Portland) presents legislation to the Judiciary Committee on May 19 that would restrict the scope of immigration-related work of individual law enforcement officers and state employees. (Emma Davis/ Maine Morning Star) As some communities in Maine have clashed, with varying outcomes, over local police contracting with federal immigration authorities, legislators are pushing for new state laws that would make those decisions universal. On Monday, dozens of people packed the Maine Legislature's Judiciary Committee room, spilling into two overflow rooms, to testify largely in support of two bills proposed by Democrats that would restrict local authorities from carrying out federal immigration enforcement. For the most part, testimony for and against plans in Augusta mirrored the arguments that have been voiced in board meetings in a coastal community in Southern Maine. In April, the Wells Police Department became the first local agency in Maine to contract with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement under what's called the 287(g) program, which has divided the community. After the 287(g) program was discontinued in 2012 due to the discovery of discriminatory practices such as racial profiling, President Donald Trump revived it to bolster ICE's capacity by deputizing local police officers to detain immigrants, an authority otherwise generally reserved to federal authorities. Wells community divided over ICE agreement with local police Participation is growing across the country. As of Monday, ICE had signed 588 agreements with agencies in 40 states. Six states have laws or policies that prohibit participation, according to ICE. Wells remains the only local agency in the program in Maine. Monmouth Winthrop Police Department, a combination of departments that serve central Maine communities, applied for the program but withdrew its application after community pushback. While immigration is a federal matter by law, work on the local level is key. An estimated 70% of ICE arrests nationwide over the past decade have been handoffs from state or local authorities. The effect of both bills, LD 1259 and LD 1971, would be to prohibit state and local law enforcement agencies from carrying out the work of federal immigration authorities. LD 1259 would do so by explicitly prohibiting contracts with such authorities, while LD 1971 would place restrictions on enforcement activities absent such formal agreements, which is the case for the majority of police departments in Maine that currently have local discretion regarding when to involve federal officials. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX A fine point was placed on that subjectivity when Sen. Rachel Talbot Ross (D-Cumberland) questioned Kennebec County Sheriff Ken Mason, who testified against both bills on behalf of the Maine Sheriffs Association's Legislative Policy Committee, about general police protocols for when to involve federal agents, in light of a routine traffic stop in Waldo County leading to two immigration detentions. 'At what point in that dichotomy of events is the decision made to contact Border Patrol and why?' Talbot Ross asked. Mason responded, 'I have to rely on my deputies and the supervisors that are working the road that day to make a judgment call on if they believe they need to call somebody.' The text of LD 1259 is succinct. Sponsored by Rep. Ambureen Rana (D-Bangor), the legislation would prohibit state or local law enforcement agencies or officers from entering into contracts with federal immigration enforcement authorities. LD 1971, sponsored by Rep. Deqa Dhalac (D-South Portland), would restrict the scope of immigration-related work of individual law enforcement officers and state employees regardless of federal contracts. Specifically, LD 1971 would prohibit state and local law enforcement agencies from 'stopping, investigating, interrogating, arresting or detaining' a person for immigration enforcement purposes. This would include in response to a hold request, immigration detainer or administrative warrant issued by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. It would also prevent law enforcement from holding someone solely for immigration enforcement purposes for longer than 48 hours and establish clear protocols during custody, including requiring law enforcement to inform incarcerated people of their rights before an interview by an immigration authority. Home rule is wonderful until it comes to our constitutional rights, which our federal authorities are violating right now. – Ambureen Rana The bill specifies that it would not prohibit a law enforcement agency from arresting, detaining or performing other law enforcement duties due to reasons not solely based on the person's immigration status. Other than law enforcement, LD 1971 would prohibit state employees from inquiring into immigration status unless the inquiry is required by law or necessary to provide the service sought by the resident. Proponents say that allowing local police to carry out federal immigration enforcement would erode public trust and safety. Lisa Parisio, policy director at the Immigrant Legal Advocacy Project, Maine's only state-wide immigration legal services organization, said ILAP's clients have already reported that they've decided to not call the police when they wanted to out of fear for their own safety and that they are scared to continue serving as a witness in court. Some of their clients have also reported that they're not pursuing higher education out of fear of immigration enforcement, which Parisio described as a loss to Maine's future economy. Many who testified focused on cost. Proponents said the bills would protect local tax dollars from being strained to carry out federal responsibilities. Under 287(g) agreements, ICE is responsible for the cost of training and information technology infrastructure, however the local law enforcement agency bears all other costs, including personnel expenses such as salary and overtime, benefits and lawsuits, according to the general memorandum of understanding. Rep. Elizabeth Caruso (R-Caratunk) said she appreciated this local control argument but asked Rana, in that spirit, why not leave the decision of whether to contract with federal immigration authorities up to local communities? 'I believe that we shouldn't be tying the hands of our local law enforcement by allowing the federal government to pressure them into these agreements,' Rana responded. 'Home rule is wonderful until it comes to our constitutional rights, which our federal authorities are violating right now.' Many proponents also highlighted this latter point, that they do not want local police to be implicated with a federal agency that has been accused of disregarding due process. Immigration detention increase reveals expanded federal operations in Maine Auburn Police Chief Jason Moen, who testified against both bills on behalf of the Maine Chiefs of Police Association, said he reviewed information about the 287(g) program and decided against his department participating. However, he does not think the blanket ban on such agreements in Rana's bill is the right approach, nor the restrictions on cooperating with federal authorities for immigration matters in the other bill. 'It disrupts long standing partnerships among local, state and federal agencies and will prevent local law enforcement from exercising discretion in critical situations,' Moen said. Moen and Mason from the Maine Sheriffs Association were the only two people to testify against the bills on Monday. Other groups submitted testimony in opposition, including the Maine County Commissioners Association to LD 1259. The association's legislative policy committee co-chairs, Stephen Gordon and Jean-Marie Caterina, wrote that the legislation could put at risk federal funding that county jails receive to detain people accused of violating federal law. 'These funds help defray county jail operating costs, which is good for local property taxpayers who are asked to fund the great bulk of the cost of operating county jails,' they wrote. As Maine has seen an uptick in immigration detentions, some immigrants rights advocates have raised concern about the financial incentives prisons and jails have to assist with the Trump administration's goal of expanding space for immigration detention. The Democratic proposals come after Republicans presented a conflicting bill last month that would prevent local agencies from adopting any policies that restrict them from assisting in the enforcement of federal immigration law. None of these bills have received committee votes yet and there is only a month left until lawmakers are expected to conclude their work for the first year of Maine's two-year Legislative session. Rana told Maine Morning Star that the intention is for the Legislature to make its decisions on the topic this year. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
