Homeland Security Kicks Arpaio and County Out of Secure Communities Program

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano announced today that Maricopa County has been terminated from the controversial 287(g) Secure Communities program as a result of the Justice Department's report today finding civil rights violations.

“The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is troubled by the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) findings of discriminatory policing practices within the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office (MCSO). Discrimination undermines law enforcement and erodes the public trust. DHS will not be a party to such practices. Accordingly, and effective immediately, DHS is terminating MCSO’s 287(g) jail model agreement and is restricting the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office access to the Secure Communities program.

DHS will utilize federal resources for the purpose of identifying and detaining those individuals who meet U.S. Immigration Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) immigration enforcement priorities. The Department will continue to enforce federal immigration laws in Maricopa County in smart, effective ways that focus our resources on criminal aliens, recent border crossers, repeat and egregious immigration law violators and employers who knowingly hire illegal labor.”

Now it's time to end Secure Communities.

< Senate Passes Defense Authorization Bill | RIP Christopher Hitchens >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Even without Joe Arpaio (5.00 / 0) (#1)
    by rdandrea on Thu Dec 15, 2011 at 07:06:10 PM EST
    Secure Communities is still a terrible program.

    So Sheriff Joe's XMas dinner budget is reduced (5.00 / 0) (#2)
    by Mr Natural on Thu Dec 15, 2011 at 07:18:43 PM EST
    to 4 cents/plate?

    This is good news (none / 0) (#3)
    by Towanda on Thu Dec 15, 2011 at 10:34:43 PM EST
    if a long-overdue determination, as I was shocked in reading a report just this week of how many U.S. citizens have been rounded up as immigrants and treated almost as terribly as are immigrants in Arizona.  That anyone is treated so terribly in my name so angers me.  But that Arizona refuses to even do routine checks on citizenship -- just as Arpaio refused to do routine work on reported rapes -- is just flipping the bird at the Constitution and begging for this smackdown.

    I have heard several stories lately, by the way, from friends who work in large corporations that require a lot of national (or international) travel, and word is out to avoid Arizona, as too many coworkers have been stopped and hassled there too often.

    People who sneak into this country (none / 0) (#4)
    by MyLeftMind on Tue Dec 27, 2011 at 10:47:44 AM EST
    are the ones who put their families at risk of separation by deportation. It's not the fault of the government that they broke the law and put their families at risk. They're making choices just like someone who chooses to sell drugs for a living or who mugs people or commits other crimes that would "separate" them from their family when they're caught.

    Why are liberals so eager to support people who break the law and sneak ahead of the line over those who are willing to wait their turn to immigrate? Why are the cheaters prioritized ahead of immigrants who are willing to abide by the rules? And why do liberals do the dirty work of companies and employers eager to benefit from this massive, continual influx of illegal aliens willing to undermine our working class?

    The law abiding citizens of this country are being unjustly criticized for asking the government to uphold the law. This is a good thing that racism got a smack down in Maricopa County. But a call to end this program is ridiculous. The law should be enforced without ethnic bias. It's wrong that the federal government has decided to enforce the law selectively ("The Department will continue to enforce federal immigration laws in... ways that focus our resources on... recent border crossers...").

    If someone sells drugs to kids for fifteen years, should they get a pass because they've been doing it for a while? After all, if they go to jail, the authorities might be separating them from their family. If someone can't afford car insurance, is it OK if they drive their car anyway? Or should society be able to demand they take a bus if they can't afford car insurance? If those laws are upheld, why can't society demand that people not live in this country unless they've followed the rules and laws we've created? Why is breaking the rules for a long time suddenly a pass for not having to follow the law?

    Yes, it's hard that families get separated. But it's just as hard for families of criminals who commit crimes that land them in jail. I wish liberals would take a look at what they're creating when they push to support illegal immigration in our country, instead of having knee-jerk responses toward not "separating" families.