Supervisors to weigh county jails’ collaboration with ICE agents

Los Angeles County supervisors are nearing a decision on whether to extend a controversial program with federal immigration authorities that targets potentially deportable immigrants who have been convicted of serious crimes.

The program, known as 287(g), places U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in county jails and trains county employees to question inmates convicted of certain felonies to determine whether they may be in the country illegally. Inmates identified through the program are often taken into ICE custody after they are released from jail.

Opponents of the program, which is scheduled to come before the Board of Supervisors on Tuesday, say it blurs the line between criminal and immigration law enforcement and opens up the county to legal liability.

They say the agreement between the Sheriff’s Department and ICE erodes trust in law enforcement among immigrant communities and results in racial profiling. Also, they argue, jail employees charged with investigating inmates’ legal status often are not adequately versed in the complexities of immigration law, and sometimes misidentify inmates as deportable.

The idea of having jail employees “questioning and making determinations about whether someone may be deportable is very alarming,” said Jennie Pasquarella, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California, which has asked the board to reject the contract. Pasquarella said lawmakers should delay the vote until a new sheriff is elected and sworn in.

Both candidates vying to replace interim Sheriff John Scott in the November election have voiced opposition to 287(g).

Supporters of the program, including Supervisor Gloria Molina, say it is a crucial public safety tool that targets only the most dangerous criminals.

“These are people who have been convicted of a felony,” said Molina, who represents eastern L.A. County. “It could be rape, it could be attempted murder. If you’re a convicted felon, you’re not welcome in our community.”

Tuesday’s vote comes as state and local governments across the country have been rethinking their relationship with federal immigration officials. The number of law enforcement jurisdictions participating in 287(g) has decreased from 75 to 35 in recent years, ICE spokeswoman Lori Haley said.

Many immigrant advocacy groups have opposed not only 287(g), which concerns how inmates are flagged as possibly deportable, but also the manner in which ICE takes inmates into custody after they serve their time in local jails.

For years, ICE has maintained a practice of asking local law enforcement officials to hold potentially deportable inmates beyond the length of their jail terms, sometimes for days, so that ICE agents can pick them up.

A new California law known as the Trust Act prohibits local law enforcement officials from honoring such requests from immigration agents except when inmates have been charged with or convicted of a serious offense.

Following a federal court ruling in April that found an Oregon county liable for damages after it held an inmate beyond her release date, dozens of cities and counties across the country, including Los Angeles County, announced they would stop honoring ICE hold requests altogether.

Immigrant advocates hailed the announcement at the time, but now say L.A. County has not implemented the new policy and continues to hold some inmates past their release date.

Pasquarella said the ACLU has investigated numerous such cases. She cited a recent case in which a U.S. citizen inmate was held by the county after he had completed his sentence and was not released until his sister came to the jail and presented deputies with his birth certificate.

Sheriff’s Cmdr. Jody Sharp, who heads the department’s custody operations division, said she had not heard of that case — and insisted the county is no longer honoring ICE hold requests.

“We work within the law,” she said.

kate.linthicum@latimes.com