home

Legal Group Sues Over ICE Immigration Raids

The Seton Hall law school's Center for Social Justice (which does great work on behalf of the Guantanamo detainees) has filed a lawsuit against ICE challenging their immigration raids. You can read the complaint and exhibits here.

The suit, against officials of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, on behalf of 10 plaintiffs, including two United States citizens, contends that teams of ICE agents used “deceit or, in some cases, raw force” to gain “unlawful entry.”

The lawsuit claims that agents, sometimes misrepresenting themselves as local police officers hunting for criminals, entered homes where no fugitives being sought were present and detained residents without showing any legal cause. Immigration agents have broad authority to question foreigners about their immigration status, but they may not enter a home without either a warrant or consent.

Some examples of the complained of ICE actions: [More...]

One plaintiff in the lawsuit, Maria Argueta, has been a legal immigrant since 2001. During a predawn operation in January at her home in North Bergen, N.J., the lawsuit claims, ICE agents persuaded Ms. Argueta to open her door by telling her they were police officers searching for a wanted criminal. Ms. Argueta was detained and held for 36 hours.

Another plaintiff, Arturo Flores, a United States citizen, said ICE agents showed no warrant when they forced their way into his house in Clifton, N.J., in November 2006 and conducted a search. A third plaintiff, Veronica Covias, a legal immigrant in Paterson, N.J., said agents pushed open her door in March 2007 even though she demanded that they show her a warrant.

A resource guide for those adversely affected by the ICE raids is here.

< Friday Morning Open Thread | Cyril Wecht Jury Deadlocked, Will Return Monday >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Xenophobia (none / 0) (#1)
    by madamab on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 11:21:06 AM EST
    is not a uniting principle.

    Thanks, George W, for scaring us so badly we don't want to even acknowledge the basic human rights our Founding Fathers believed in.

    List the basic (none / 0) (#4)
    by Wile ECoyote on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 11:40:56 AM EST
    human rights our founding fathers believed in please?  Slavery?  

    Parent
    If Chimpy is going to protect you (none / 0) (#2)
    by lilybart on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 11:24:22 AM EST
    you must allow him into your home, your email, your mail and your phone calls.

    He means well, really!

    Any thorn.... (none / 0) (#3)
    by kdog on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 11:27:44 AM EST
    in the side of ICE is a friend of mine.

    Rock on Center for Social Justice!

    Things I'm sure of (none / 0) (#5)
    by LonewackoDotCom on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 01:14:31 PM EST
    I don't know the details of this case, but I'm sure that ICE has their side of the story, even if TL hasn't seen fit to find out what it is.

    However, whatever the details of this current case, I'm absolutely positive that we can do raids after "reform" passes. One of "reforms" selling points is strict enforcement, and I'm absolutely positive that we can trust its proponents not to endlessly sue in order to block "reform"-mandated enforcement.

    I'm sure they won't do that because they just want "reform". It's not like they want basically open borders or anything like that. Oh, no. They don't want that.

    If the ICE guys (none / 0) (#6)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 02:42:09 PM EST
    entered the homes illegally they should bear whatever the appropriate consequences their actions may incur.

    Seems pretty straight forward.

    Why do I get the feeling many here do not feel the same way about immigrants who entered the country illegally?

    Oh I don't know.... (none / 0) (#7)
    by kdog on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 03:03:01 PM EST
    Personally, I see a distinction between an imaginary line drawn on a map and the front door to someone's home. But I'm a knucklehead:)

    The Libertarian platform on immigration is growing on me.  There's parts I don't like, parts others will not like...but it seems fair and consistent with placing liberty as the default position.  I most definitely think it would be an improvement to what we've got now.

    From the party's 2006 convention...

    IV.1 Immigration

    The Issue: Our borders are currently neither open, closed, nor secure. This situation restricts the labor pool, encouraging employers to hire undocumented workers, while leaving those workers neither subject to nor protected by the law. A completely open border allows foreign criminals, carriers of communicable diseases, terrorists and other potential threats to enter the country unchecked. Pandering politicians guarantee access to public services for undocumented aliens, to the detriment of those who would enter to work productively, and increasing the burden on taxpayers.

    The Principle: The legitimate function and obligation of government to protect the lives, rights and property of its citizens, requires awareness of and control over the entry into our country of foreign nationals who pose a threat to security, health or property. Political freedom and escape from tyranny demands that individuals not be unreasonably constrained by government in the crossing of political boundaries. Economic freedom demands the unrestricted movement of human as well as financial capital across national borders.

    Solutions: Borders will be secure, with free entry to those who have demonstrated compliance with certain requirements. The terms and conditions of entry into the United States must be simple and clearly spelled out. Documenting the entry of individuals must be restricted to screening for criminal background and threats to public health and national security. It is the obligation of the prospective immigrant to demonstrate compliance with these requirements. Once effective immigration policies are in place, general amnesties will no longer be necessary.

    Transitional Action: Ensure immigration requirements include only appropriate documentation, screening for criminal background and threats to public health and national security. Simplifying the immigration process and redeployment of surveillance technology to focus on the borders will encourage the use of regular and monitored entry points, thus preventing trespass and saving lives. End federal requirements that benefits and services be provided to those in the country illegally. Repeal all measures that punish employers for hiring undocumented workers. Repeal all immigration quotas.



    Parent
    Seriously? (none / 0) (#8)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 03:17:58 PM EST
    If there was a door on the border there'd be no distinction? We can have that arranged. ;-)


    Parent
    with the addition of some method by which all workers are paid at least the minimum wage, and no under-the-table stuff. That includes household workers hired by homeowners.

    Parent