United States of America v. State of California et al

Filing 75

DECLARATION of Joe Dominic in opposition to 2 Motion for Preliminary Injunction. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Chris Caligiuri, # 2 Declaration of Arif Alikhan, # 3 Declaration of Jim Hart, # 4 Declaration of Jeffrey Rosen, # 5 Declaration of Diana Carbajal, # 6 Declaration of Holly Cooper, # 7 Declaration of Tom Wong)(Sherman, Lee)

Download PDF
XAVIER BECERRA Attorney General of California 2 THOMAS PATTERSON 3 MICHAEL NEWMAN SATOSHI YANAI 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Senior Assistant Attorney General Supervising Deputy Attorneys General CHRISTINE CHUANG ANTHONY HAKL CHEROKEE DM MELTON LEE I. SHERMAN Deputy Attorneys General State Bar No. 272271 300 S. Spring Street Los Angeles, CA 90013 Telephone: (213) 269-6404 Fax: (213) 897-7605 E-mail: Lee.Sherman@doj.ca.gov Attorneys for Defendants 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 12 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Case No. 2:18-cv-00490-JAM-K.JN Plaintiff, DECLARATION OF ARIF ALIKHAN IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS' OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA; EDMUND INJUNCTION GERALD BROWN JR., Governor of California, in his official capacity; and XAVIER BECERRA, Attorney General of Judge: Honorable John A. Mendez California, in his official capacity, Action Filed: March 6, 2018 v. Defendants. 23 24 25 26 27 28 Deel. of Arif Alikhan in Supp. ofDefs.' Opp'n to Pl.'s Mot. for Prelim. Inj. (18-cv-00490-JAM-KJN) I, Arif Alikhan, declare as follows: 2 1. I have personal knowledge of all facts stated except for those facts specifically 3 stated to be based on information and belief. If called as a witness, I could and would testify 4 competently to the information set forth in this Declaration. 5 2. I have been employed with the Los Angeles Police Department ("LAPD") since 6 February of 2014. I am the Director of the Office of Constitutional Policing and Policy and serve 7 as the highest-ranking civilian in the LAPD. 8 3. I have previously served as a federal prosecutor in Los Angeles where I prosecuted 9 numerous federal immigration and violent crime offenses. In addition, I served in senior policy 1o positions at the United States Department of Justice and United States Department of Homeland 11 Security in both the Bush and Obama Administrations, and have extensive experience and 12 knowledge of federal law enforcement and federal immigration enforcement law. I also served as 13 the Deputy Mayor for Homeland Security and Public Safety for the City of Los Angeles where I 14 oversaw community policing and gang reduction efforts by the City's law enforcement and city 15 services agencies. 16 4. As the Director of Constitutional Policing and Policy, I am aware of and familiar 17 with LAPD's various policies and practices including those regarding criminal immigration 18 enforcement, joint operations and task forces with federal law enforcement agencies such as U.S. 19 Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the transfer of arrestees to other agencies, and the 20 sharing of criminal investigative and custodial information with other entities and the public. I 21 am also familiar with local, state, and federal law involving the detention, arrest, transfer, and 22 sharing of information with the other law enforcement entities. 23 5. The mission of the LAPD is to protect and to serve all community members from 24 crime and disorder regardless of an individual's race, ethnicity, or civil immigration status. For 25 over forty years, the LAPD has implemented numerous policies and procedures to ensure that its 26 enforcement of the law is consistent with local, state, and federal restrictions and is done so in a 27 constitutional and just manner. 28 1 Deel. of Arif Alil<han in Supp. ofDefs.' Opp'n to Pl.'s Mot. for Prelim. Inj. (18-cv-00490-JAM-KJN) 1 6. The LAPD has implemented numerous policies and programs that promote 2 partnership, collaboration, and transparency with the communities it serves to reduce crime and 3 improve the public's trust in law enforcement actions. Through a robust community policing 4 strategy implemented since the civil disturbances of 1992, the LAPD and community members 5 have driven down violent crime to record lows. In addition, the LAPD, in collaboration with 6 community members, has dramatically reduced the level of gang violence to previously- 7 unexpected lows, especially in areas with large concentrations of immigrant communities. 8 9 7. In 1979, the LAPD began a policy known as Special Order 40- adopted by the Los Angeles Board of Police Commissioners and signed by then-Chief of Police Daryl Gates. 1o Special Order 40 restricted an officer from initiating a police action with the objective of 11 discovering a person's immigration status, and also prohibited misdemeanor arrests for violations 12 of Title 8, United States Code Section 1325 (Improper Entry). 13 8. This policy was adopted to ensure that individuals, regardless of their civil 14 immigration status, would report crimes to the LAPD and assist the LAPD in apprehending and 15 prosecuting those individuals responsible for criminal acts. 16 9. The provisions of Special Order 40, which are reflected in various forms in 17 LAPD's existing policies and procedures, are also consistent with current federal and state law 18 since the policy restricts initiating a detention based on an individual's civil immigration status or 19 arresting an individual for a misdemeanor violation that did not occur in the officer's presence. 20 10. In 2014, LAPD adopted a practice ofno longer detaining individuals otherwise 21 eligible for release from custody under state law on the basis ofrequests from U.S. Immigration 22 and Customs Enforcement ("ICE"). LAPD ceased detaining individuals based on these agency 23 requests unless they were accompanied by a judicial determination of probable cause that the 24 arrestee was involved in a criminal offense or an otherwise valid warrant from a judicial officer. 25 This practice was developed in response to judicial decisions holding that such detentions were 26 unconstitutional. In addition, this practice further supports LAPD's robust community policing 27 strategy focused on preventing crime through community partnerships, collaborative problem 28 2 Deel. of Arif Alikhan in Supp. ofDefs.' Opp'n to PL 's Mot. for Prelim. Inj. (18-cv-00490-JAM-KJN) solving, and building public trust-essential components to r.educing crime and protecting the 2 public from harm. 3 11. When a member of LAPD arrests an individual in connection with a criminal 4 offense, the arrestee may be cited and released in the field, or taken to one of LAPD's ten jail 5 detention facilities for booking. Those LAPD jail facilities are local detention facilities used for 6 the temporary, short-term detention of person who are generally not held for more than 96 hours. 7 In most instances, persons arrested by LAPD officers are released on bail or transferred to the 8 custody of the Los Angeles County Sheriffs Department within 48 hours. In many instances, 9 arrestees are eligible for release from custody within a few hours of arrest and booking, including 10 by posting bail or bond, on their own recognizance, or by a certificate of release. The short-term 11 nature o(LAPD's detention therefore makes it impractical for LAPD to provide notice to ICE in 12 advance of releasing a detainee. 13 12. While arrestees are in LAPD custody, LAPD permits personnel from the U.S. 14 Department of Homeland Security ("DHS") and ICE access to LAPD detention facilities to 15 interview individual arrestees. LAPD does so consistent with California law which requires 16 obtaining informed, written consent prior to any such interview. If the arrestee declines the 17 interview, tlie LAPD does not provide DHS or ICE personnel access to its facilities in order to 18 interview that individual. 19 13. LAPD also has a policy, consistent with state and federal law, against participating 20 with ICE to enforce civil immigration law. This includes participation in the federal 21 government's voluntary program authorized under Section 1357(g) of Title 8 of the United States 22 Code. Otherwise known as "287(g) authority," this program authorizes local law enforcement 23 officers to perform civil immigration enforcement if the agencies meet the qualification and 24 training requirements and are granted the civil enforcement authority by the federal government. 25 14. I am familiar with the provisions Senate Bill 54 ("SB 54"), adopted by the State 26 Legislature and approved by the Governor on October 5, 2017. The mandates adopted in SB 54 27 largely are consistent with LAPD's previous and often long-standing, policies regarding civil and 28 criminal immigration enforcement. 3 Deel. of Arif Alikhan in Supp. ofDefs.' Opp'n to Pl.'s Mot. for Prelim. Inj. (I 8-cv-00490-JAM-KJN) 1 15. SB 54 prohibits local law enforcement agencies from inquiring into an individual's 2 immigration status, detaining an individual on the basis of a hold request, allowing federal 3 immigration authorities access to interview an individual in custody unless in compliance with 4 state statutory requirements, and performing the functions of an immigration officer pursuant to 5 Section I357(g) of Title 8 of the United States Code. As discussed above, LAPD's existing 6 policies and procedures already provide for these restrictions and therefore SB 54 does not 7 substantially change LAPD's practices regarding these activities. 8 9 16. SB 54' s mandates relating to the treatment of information regarding individuals in LAPD custody also do not change existing LAPD policies and practices in a meaningful way. SB 1o 54' s restrictions against providing the release date of a person in LAPD custody or personal 11 information such as an individual's home or work address generally are consistent with existing 12 LAPD policies limiting public disclosure of personal information concerning inmates and do not 13 change LAPD's practices regarding such information. SB 54's limitations on transferring 14 individuals in LAPD custody to federal immigration authorities also do not change existing 15 LAPD policies or practices. 16 17. LAPD's policies regarding immigrant communities are rooted in a commitment to 17 constitutional policing and to the principle that all of Los Angeles is safer when our officers 18 maintain a relationship of trust, respect and cooperation with the City's residents. The 19 cooperation of immigrant communities to report crimes and assist in the investigation and 20 . prosecution of criminals is critical to the fair and effective enforcement of the law and the safety 21 of all members of the community. When people feel confident they can come forward as a victim 22 or a witness to a crime, irrespective of civil immigration status, LAPD's ability to reduce violent 23 crimes, especially those involving violent gang members, is significantly improved. 24 18. The policy behind Special Order 40, as expressed by the LAPD Board of Police 25 Commissioners nearly forty years ago, is "the principle that effective law enforcement depends 26 on a high degree of cooperation between the Department and the public it serves." The State 27 Legislature expressed a similar policy in adopting SB54: "A relationship of trust between 28 4 Deel. of Arif Alikhan in Supp. of Defs.' Opp 'n to Pl.' s Mot. for Prelim. Inj. ( l 8-cv-00490-JAM-KJN) 1 California's immigrant community and state and local agencies is central to the public safety of 2 the people of California." (Cal. Gov't CodeĀ§ 7284.2(b)). 3 19. Trust, respect and cooperation are essential to public safety in Los Angeles. 4 LAPD's long-standing policies and practices promote and maintain those principles. On the other 5 hand, if immigrant communities fear that LAPD officers are acting as agents of federal 6 immigration authorities, the relationship between the police and these communities will erode. 7 Immigrant communities will be less willing to report crimes and cooperate with criminal 8 investigations - and threaten the public safety of all who live and work in Los Angeles. 9 1o I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States that the foregoing is 11 true and correct and that this declaration was executed on April 30, 2018 in Los Angeles, 12 California. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 5 Deel. of Arif Alikhan in Supp. ofDefs.' Opp'n to Pl.'s Mot. for Prelim. Inj. (18-cv-00490-JAM-KJN)

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?