KAILUA-KONA — A resolution that at least one state legislator says is tantamount to rendering Hawaii a sanctuary for undocumented immigrants was adopted by the Hawaii House of Representatives Wednesday. ADVERTISING KAILUA-KONA — A resolution that at least one state
KAILUA-KONA — A resolution that at least one state legislator says is tantamount to rendering Hawaii a sanctuary for undocumented immigrants was adopted by the Hawaii House of Representatives Wednesday.
Introduced by Rep. Joy San Buenaventura, Puna, House Resolution 76 declares Hawaii as a ho’okipa, or welcoming, state. It requests that the state and all of its counties refrain from honoring immigration detainers issued by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) as well as from participating in a program allowing for the enlistment of local law enforcement as immigration agents.
An immigration detainer is a request by a federal agency, typically ICE, to hold a detained individual for up to 48 hours after he or she would normally be released on bond or because a criminal charge could not be established. It allows time for ICE to initiate a transfer of custody and opens the door for potential deportation proceedings.
Nowhere in the language of the nonbinding resolution is the term “sanctuary” used. But it implores political leadership to avoid agreements under section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act that would allow for the deputization of local police as immigration agents as well as “any other law enforcement activities that collaborate with ICE or any other federal law enforcement agency in connection with the deportation of undocumented immigrants who have not been convicted of committing a violent crime.”
The resolution cites the 10th Amendment guaranteeing state sovereignty as well as protection from demands made by the federal government that a state enforce its directives, referencing the “immense financial burden” of being forced to do so.
Also on Wednesday, the American Civil Liberties Union of Hawaii sent a letter to the state and every county making essentially the same request as the resolution.
“People across the country are urging local governments to stand up to (President) Trump’s dangerous immigration agenda, which seeks to indiscriminately tear communities and families apart. We must instead uphold and renew our founding commitments to diversity, inclusiveness and opportunity,” Mateo Caballero, legal director of the ACLU of Hawaii, said in a press release. “We urge the counties and the State of Hawaii to put local communities and the constitution first and refuse becoming accomplices to the administration’s future civil rights abuses.”
The characterization of intensified immigration enforcement as discrimination or as an abuse of civil rights is controversial. Opponents of that argument cite federal law, which states in no uncertain terms that those who enter the United States by means outside of established parameters have committed a crime and are living in the country illegally.
Rep. Gene Ward, Hawaii Kai and Kalama Valley, said his concerns about the adoption of HR76 exist on a macro level that extends beyond the discussion of the rights, or lack thereof, of undocumented immigrants who reside in Hawaii.
Language in Trump’s Executive Order on Enhancing the Public Safety in the Interior of the United States, issued on Jan. 25, expressly states the intent of the federal government to deny federal grant money “except as deemed necessary for law enforcement purposes” from any sanctuary jurisdictions.
Ward said proponents of HR76 deny its adoption would classify Hawaii’s jurisdictions as sanctuary jurisdictions, but contended that argument is one merely of semantics.
He believes adopting HR76 would put Hawaii’s federal funding, which he said represents more than 20 percent of the state budget, or $1.5 billion, in peril and risk the well-being of the state’s 1.4 million citizens to aid a much smaller number of undocumented immigrants.
“We are going to be fiscally hurt. This is a very serious threat,” Ward said. “This is about sticking our finger in the eye of the Trump administration. We’re telling people not to cooperate, not to deal with the federal government, and as a nation of laws, that’s not the way to behave. This is a bad piece of legislation that is going to make Hawaii all the more marginalized.”
Claire Hanusz, an immigration attorney with Damon Key in Honolulu, said the threat to jurisdictions that fail to comply with federal directives is real and extends beyond the withholding of federal dollars.
“The federal government has really ramped up the use of detainers and is trying to do everything possible to to put pressure on local jurisdictions to honor these detainers,” she said.
She noted the federal government has published a list of jurisdictions failing to honor detainers as well as a list of crimes committed by individuals in those jurisdictions that were not detained despite requests from agencies like ICE.
Such action makes good on a promise made by Trump in the executive order referenced above, and which Hanusz said is possibly a way to shame these jurisdictions into cooperating with federal directives.
According to The Pew Charitable Trusts, Hawaii is one of only seven states that has complied with every federal detainer request it’s been issued, but added that such requests are rare in the state.
Hawaii Police Department Assistant Chief Marshall Kanehailua confirmed the rarity of such requests, saying local police actually reach out to ICE more frequently to start deportation processes of detainees who were arrested for committing violent or otherwise serious crimes, such as drug trafficking.
Detainers issued in Hawaii in general, he said, are uncommon.
“I will tell you with great confidence that this does not happen a whole lot. In fact, quite often when we have a detainer on an individual, (ICE) doesn’t come and we let them go,” Kanehailua explained. “We let (ICE) know, this is our investigation. We’re not going to hold (detainees) beyond this time. If you want to come get them, come get them, or we’re going to let them go.”
As far as the deputization of local police by federal agencies, Kanehailua said that is also rare, adding there is a lot of paperwork and an extensive review by top brass at the HPD of an agency’s plans and objectives before signing off.
Deputization, he added, is never done en masse. It’s always on a case-by-case basis and specific to a particular investigation. Deputization isn’t limited to immigration enforcement either. Situations where it’s necessary may arise with agencies such as the U.S. Marshals Service when there is a fugitive situation.
Kanehailua said he is unaware of any requests by federal agencies to deputize local officials since Trump took office.
