Utah Coalition of La Raza et al v. Herbert et al

Filing 37

Plaintiff's MEMORANDUM in Support re 36 Plaintiff's MOTION for Preliminary Injunction filed by Plaintiffs Centro Civico Mexicano, Alicia Cervantes, Coalition of Utah Progressives, Eliana Larios, Latin American Chamber of Commerce, Milton Ivan Salazar-Gomez, Salt Lake City Brown Berets, Service Employees International Union, Utah Coalition of La Raza, Workers United Rocky Mountain Joint Board. (Attachments: # 1 Order granting leave to file over length memorandum, # 2 Index of exhibits in support of Plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunction, # 3 Exhibit Exhibit 1 (HB 497), # 4 Exhibit Exhibit 2 (Archuleta Decl.), # 5 Exhibit Exhibit 3 (Medina Decl.), # 6 Exhibit Exhibit 4 (Gerkin Decl.), # 7 Exhibit Exhibit 5 (Cordova Decl.), # 8 Exhibit Exhibit 6 (Picardi Decl.), # 9 Exhibit Exhibit 7 (Ruiz Decl.), # 10 Exhibit Exhibit 8 (Cervantes Decl.), # 11 Exhibit Exhibit 9 (Larios Decl.), # 12 Exhibit Exhibit 10 (Gascon Decl.), # 13 Exhibit Exhibit 11 (Gonzalez Decl.), # 14 Exhibit Exhibit 12 (Burbank Decl.), # 15 Exhibit Exhibit 13 (Venegas Decl.), # 16 Exhibit Exhibit 14 (Arguetta Decl.), # 17 Exhibit Exhibit 15 (Lowenthal Decl. & Ex A), # 18 Exhibit Exhibit 16 (Miller Decl. & Exs A-B), # 19 Exhibit Exhibit 17 (Fernandez Decl. & Exs A-G), # 20 Exhibit Exhibit 18 (Fernandez Decl., Exs H-K), # 21 Exhibit Exhibit 19 (Fernandez Decl., Exs L-O))(Goddard, Darcy)

Linton Joaquin*
Karen C. Tumlin*
Shiu-Ming Cheer*
Melissa S. Keaney*
NATIONAL IMMIGRATION LAW
CENTER
3435 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 2850
Los Angeles, California 90010
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Omar C. Jadwat*
Andre I. Segura*
Elora Mukherjee*
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION
FOUNDATION
125 Broad Street, 18th Floor
New York, New York 10004
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
* Pro hac vice motion pending
+ Counsel for all plaintiffs except SEIU and
Workers’ United

Cecillia D. Wang*
Katherine Desormeau*
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES
UNION FOUNDATION IMMIGRANTS’
RIGHTS PROJECT
39 Drumm Street
San Francisco, California 94111
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Darcy M. Goddard (USB No. 13426)
Esperanza Granados (USB No. 11894)
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES
UNION OF UTAH FOUNDATION, INC.
355 North 300 West
Salt Lake City, Utah 84103
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Bradley S. Phillips*+
MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP
355 South Grand Avenue
Thirty-Fifth Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90071-1560
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
[e-mail]

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH
CENTRAL DIVISION
Utah Coalition of La Raza, et al.,

DECLARATION OF LORENA
FERNANDEZ

Plaintiffs,
Case No. 2:11-cv-00401-BCW
v.
Judge: Brooke C. Wells
Gary R. Herbert, et al.,
Defendants.

I, Lorena Fernandez, hereby declare:
1.

I am paralegal for the American Civil Liberties Union Foundation

Immigrants’ Rights Project. Except where indicated, I make this Declaration based upon
my personal knowledge.
2.

Attached as Exhibit A is a true and correct copy of a News Release issued

by the Governor of Utah entitled Governor Herbert Signs Immigration Reform
Legislation, dated March 15, 2011. I obtained the document by visiting the official
website for the State of Utah,
http://www.utah.gov/governor/news_media/article.html?article=3368, on May 2, 2011.
3.

Attached as Exhibit B is a true and correct copy of the Declaration of Bo

Cooper, filed in Friendly House et al. v. Whiting, No. 2:10-cv-01061-MEA (D. Ariz.,
filed June 21, 2010). I obtained a copy of the declaration by downloading it from the
federal courts’ PACER website on May 4, 2011.
4.

Attached as Exhibit C is a true and correct copy of the Declaration of

David C. Palmatier, filed in U.S. v. Arizona, No. 2:10-cv-01413-SRB (D. Ariz., filed July
6, 2010). I obtained a copy of the declaration by downloading from the federal courts’
PACER website on May 2, 2011.
5.

Attached as Exhibit D is a true and correct copy of a News Release from

the government of Utah website entitled, Governor Herbert Issues Statement on Illegal
Immigration Reform, dated August 13, 2010. I obtained the document on May 2, 2011,
by visiting the official website of the State of Utah at
http://www.utah.gov/governor/news_media/article.html?article=4435.
6.

Attached as Exhibit E is a true and correct copy of the Statement by the

Embassy of Mexico on Lawsuit filed against HB 497 in Utah, dated May 3, 2011. I
obtained a copy of the statement by visiting the website of the Mexican Embassy on May

1

4, 2011: http://embamex.sre.gob.mx/usa/index.php/home/13-press-releases-2011/512statement-by-the-embassy-of-mexico-on-lawsuit-filed-against-hb-497-in-utah-.
7.

Attached as Exhibit F is a true and correct copy of the U.S. Immigration

and Customs Enforcement, “Interim Policy Number 10074.1: Detainers” dated August 2,
2010. I obtained a copy of the policy by visiting the official website of U.S. Immigration
and Customs Enforcement on May 3, 2011:
www.ice.gov/doclib/news/releases/2011/110302washingtondc.pdf.
8.

Attached as Exhibit G is a true and correct copy of the U.S. Immigration

and Customs Enforcement, “Civil Immigration Enforcement: Priorities for the
Apprehension, Detention, and Removal of Aliens,” dated March 2, 2011. I obtained a
copy by visiting the official website of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement on
May 4, 2011: www.ice.gov/doclib/news/releases/2011/110302washingtondc.pdf.
9.

Attached as Exhibit H is a true and correct copy of the Declaration of

Daniel H. Ragsdale, filed in U.S. v. Arizona, No. 2:10-cv-01413-SRB (D. Ariz., filed July
7, 2010). I obtained a copy of the declaration by downloading it from the federal courts’
PACER website on May 2, 2011.
10.

Attached as Exhibit I is a true and correct copy of the Declaration of Doris

Meissner, filed in Friendly House et al. v. Whiting, No. 2:10-cv-01061-MEA (D. Ariz.,
filed June 14, 2010). I obtained a copy of the declaration by downloading it from the
federal courts’ PACER website on May 2, 2011.
11.

Attached as Exhibit J is a true and correct copy of a statistical data table

entitled “FY1994 – FY2009 Number of defendants in cases filed (Results for Title 08 –
Aliens and Nationality).” I obtained this table on May 5, 2011, from the Federal Justice
Statistic Resource Center website (http://fjsrc.urban.org/tsec.cfm.), a project of the
Bureau of Justice Statistics (“BJS”). I generated the table by using an application on the

2

website that permits a user to obtain the numbers of federal criminal prosecutions brought
under any given federal federal statute in any selected years between 1994 and 2009.
12.

Attached as Exhibit K is a true and correct copy of the Declaration of

Michael Aytes, filed in U.S. v. Arizona, No. 2:10-cv-01413-SRB (D. Ariz., filed July 6,
2010). I obtained a copy of the declaration by downloading it from the federal courts’
PACER website on May 2, 2011.
13.

Attached as Exhibit L is a true and correct copy of the Declaration of

David V. Aguilar, filed in U.S. v. Arizona, No. 2:10-cv-01413-SRB (D. Ariz., filed July
6, 2010). I obtained a copy of the declaration by downloading it from the federal courts’
PACER website on May 2, 2011.
14.

Attached as Exhibit M is a true and correct copy of the Declaration of

James B. Steinberg, filed in U.S. v. Arizona, No. 2:10-cv-01413-SRB (D. Ariz., filed July
6, 2010). I obtained a copy of the declaration by downloading it from the federal courts’
PACER website on May 2, 2011.
15.

Attached as Exhibit N is a true and correct copy of information from the

Washington State Department of Licensing website regarding the proof of identity and
residence required to obtain a driver’s license in the State of Washington. I obtained a
copy of this document from the official website for the Washington State Department of
Licensing at http://www.dol.wa.gov/driverslicense/idproof.html.
16.

Attached as Exhibit O is a true and correct copy of a letter dated April 29,

2010 from U.S. Senator Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico to U.S. Attorney General Holder.
That letter was included as Exhibit 14 to the Declaration of Susan T. Boyd, filed in
Friendly House et al. v. Whiting, No. 2:10-cv-01061-MEA (D. Ariz., filed June 14,
2010). I downloaded a copy of the letter from the federal courts’ PACER website on
May 2, 2011.

3

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.

EXECUTED this 5th day of May, 2011 in San Francisco, California.

_/s/ Lorena Fernandez*_________________
Lorena Fernandez

(* I certify that I have the signed original of this
document which is available for inspection during
normal business hours by the Court or a party to this
action.)

4

Exhibit A

Governor Herbert Signs Immigration Reform Legislation | Utah Governor ...

1 of 3

http://www.utah.gov/governor/news_media/article.html?article=4435

Skip Navigation
Search all of Utah.gov »

Home
About Governor Herbert
News & Media
Priorities
Staff
Cabinet
Offices
Contact
Home
News & Media
Story Details

Governor Herbert Signs Immigration Reform Legislation
Mar 15 2011
Salt Lake City - Late this morning, Utah Governor Gary R. Herbert signed four immigration reform bills,
which combined, constitute what he calls "the Utah solution." He said, "Utah has taken a thoughtful, rational
approach and found common ground."
Flanked by business, religious, and legislative leaders in the Gold Room of the Utah Capitol, the Governor
touted the day as an historic one. "Utah did the right thing. We did the hard thing," he said. "Today I
challenge our federal delegation and those who work alongside them in Washington, D.C.: It is time to get off
the sidelines and have a meaningful dialogue about immigration in this country."
While most acknowledge immigration is primarily a federal issue, Governor Herbert said these bills provide
him some leverage at the federal level to engage the federal government in addressing Utah's challenges.
After citing his six guiding principles for immigration reform, the Governor signed the following bills:

HB 116: Utah Immigration Accountability and Enforcement Amendments
House sponsor, Representative Bill Wright
Senate floor sponsor, Senator Stuart Reid
HB 466: Migrant Workers and Related Commission Amendments
House sponsor, Representative Stephen Sandstrom
Senate floor sponsor, Senator Curtis Bramble
HB 469: Immigration Related Amendments
House sponsor, Representative John Dougall
Senate floor sponsor, Senator Wayne Niederhauser
HB 497, Utah Illegal Immigration Enforcement Act
House sponsor, Representative Stephen Sandstrom

5/2/2011 12:20 PM

Governor Herbert Signs Immigration Reform Legislation | Utah Governor ...

2 of 3

http://www.utah.gov/governor/news_media/article.html?article=4435

Senate floor sponsor, Senator Margaret Dayton
The Governor referred to the summit he convened last summer to lay the groundwork for finding legislative
solutions to the challenges of illegal immigration. "Stakeholders from all sides of this complex issue came
together to discuss options," he said, citing the process as one which has been "open, transparent, and civil."
"There are those who will say these bills may not be perfect, but they are a step in the right direction and they
are better than what we had," said the Governor. "Thanks to the vision and determination of these local
leaders, what we have begun today is a framework for a national conversation about immigration and a means
to engage the federal government. Once again, Utah leads the nation in finding solutions and making tough
choices."

Related Stories
Governor Herbert to Host Roundtable Discussion on Immigration Reform
Governor Herbert Issues Statement on Illegal Immigration Reform in Utah
Governor Herbert Signs HB67, Responds to Passage of Federal Healthcare Reform
Governor Huntsman signs Health System Reform Legislation
Governor Herbert to lead Immigration Reform Summit
If you found this news piece interesting, please consider sharing it through your social network.

Search

Press Releases and Advisories
News Advisories
News Releases

Media Contacts
Ally Isom
Deputy Chief of Staff
Office: [phone]
Mobile: [phone]

5/2/2011 12:20 PM

Governor Herbert Signs Immigration Reform Legislation | Utah Governor ...

3 of 3

http://www.utah.gov/governor/news_media/article.html?article=4435

Brian Somers
Associate Director of Communications
Office: [phone]
Mobile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

Subscriptions
RSS feed for News Releases
RSS feed for News Advisories
RSS feed for both News Releases & News Advisories
Follow announcements on Twitter
Utah.gov Home | Utah.gov Terms of Use | Utah.gov Privacy Policy | Utah.gov Accessibility Policy | Translate Utah.gov
Copyright © 2010 State of Utah - All rights reserved.

5/2/2011 12:20 PM

Exhibit B

Case 2:10-cv-01061-JWS Document 111

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

Filed 06/14/10 Page 1 of 24

Omar C. Jadwat (admitted pro hac vice)
Lucas Guttentag (admitted pro hac vice)
Tanaz Moghadam (admitted pro hac vice)
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION
FOUNDATION IMMIGRANTS’
RIGHTS PROJECT
125 Broad Street, 18th Floor
New York, New York 10004
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Thomas A. Saenz (admitted pro hac vice)
[e-mail]
Cynthia Valenzuela Dixon (admitted pro hac
vice)
Linton Joaquin (admitted pro hac vice)
Victor Viramontes (admitted pro hac vice)
Karen C. Tumlin (admitted pro hac vice)
Gladys Limón (admitted pro hac vice)
Nora A. Preciado (admitted pro hac vice) Nicholás Espíritu (admitted pro hac vice)
Melissa S. Keaney (admitted pro hac vice) MEXICAN AMERICAN LEGAL
Vivek Mittal (admitted pro hac vice)
DEFENSE AND EDUCATIONAL FUND
Ghazal Tajmiri (admitted pro hac vice)
634 S. Spring Street, 11th Floor
NATIONAL IMMIGRATION LAW
Los Angeles, California 90014
CENTER
Telephone: [phone]
3435 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 2850
Facsimile: [phone]
Los Angeles, California 90010
[e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
[e-mail]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
[e-mail]
Additional Co-Counsel on Subsequent Pages

18

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
19

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
20
21

Friendly House; et al.,
Plaintiffs,

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

v.
Michael B. Whiting; et al.,
Defendants.

CASE NO. CV-10-01061-PHX-JWS
LODGED: PROPOSED
DECLARATION OF BO COOPER
ATTACHED

Case 2:10-cv-01061-JWS Document 111

1
2
3
4
5

Filed 06/14/10 Page 2 of 24

Daniel J. Pochoda (SBA No. 021979)
Anne Lai** (SBA No. 172162)
ACLU FOUNDATION OF ARIZONA
77 E. Columbus Street, Suite 205
Phoenix, Arizona 85012
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

Cecillia D. Wang (admitted pro hac vice)
Harini P. Raghupathi (admitted pro hac
vice)
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES
UNION FOUNDATION
IMMIGRANTS’ RIGHTS
PROJECT
39 Drumm Street
San Francisco, California 94111
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

Nina Perales (admitted pro hac vice)
Ivan Espinoza-Madrigal*
MEXICAN AMERICAN LEGAL
DEFENSE AND EDUCATIONAL
FUND
110 Broadway Street, Suite 300
San Antonio, Texas 78205
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

Julie A. Su (admitted pro hac vice)
Ronald Lee*
Yungsuhn Park (admitted pro hac vice)
Connie Choi (admitted pro hac vice)
Carmina Ocampo (admitted pro hac vice)
ASIAN PACIFIC AMERICAN
LEGAL CENTER, a member
of Asian American Center for
Advancing Justice
1145 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 200
Los Angeles, California 90017
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

Chris Newman*
Lisa Kung*
NATIONAL DAY LABOR
ORGANIZING NETWORK
675 S. Park View Street, Suite B
Los Angeles, California 90057
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

Laura D. Blackburne*
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
FOR THE ADVANCEMENT
OF COLORED PEOPLE (NAACP)
4805 Mt. Hope Drive
Baltimore, Maryland 21215
Telephone: [phone]
[e-mail]

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Daniel R. Ortega, Jr. (SBA No. 005015)
ROUSH, MCCRACKEN, GUERRERO,
MILLER & ORTEGA
1112 E. Washington Street
Phoenix, Arizona 85034
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]

Case 2:10-cv-01061-JWS Document 111

Filed 06/14/10 Page 3 of 24

Bradley S. Phillips+ (admitted pro hac
vice)
Paul J. Watford+ (admitted pro hac vice)
Joseph J. Ybarra+ (admitted pro hac vice)
Elisabeth J. Neubauer+ (admitted pro hac
vice)
MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP+
355 South Grand Avenue
Thirty-Fifth Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90071-1560
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

Susan Traub Boyd+ (admitted pro hac
vice)
Yuval Miller+ (admitted pro hac vice)
MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP+
560 Mission Street
Twenty-Seventh Floor
San Francisco, CA 94105-2907
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

+Attorneys for all plaintiffs except Service Employees International Union, Service
Employees International Union, Local 5, United Food and Commercial Workers
International Union, and Japanese American Citizens League
*Application for admission pro hac vice forthcoming
**Admitted pursuant to Ariz. Sup. Ct. R. 38(f)

Case 2:10-cv-01061-JWS Document 111

Filed 06/14/10 Page 4 of 24

Case 2:10-cv-01061-JWS Document 111

Filed 06/14/10 Page 5 of 24

Case 2:10-cv-01061-JWS Document 111

Filed 06/14/10 Page 6 of 24

Case 2:10-cv-01061-JWS Document 111

Filed 06/14/10 Page 7 of 24

Case 2:10-cv-01061-JWS Document 111

Filed 06/14/10 Page 8 of 24

Case 2:10-cv-01061-JWS Document 111

Filed 06/14/10 Page 9 of 24

Case 2:10-cv-01061-JWS Document 111

Filed 06/14/10 Page 10 of 24

Case 2:10-cv-01061-JWS Document 111

Filed 06/14/10 Page 11 of 24

Case 2:10-cv-01061-JWS Document 111

Filed 06/14/10 Page 12 of 24

Case 2:10-cv-01061-JWS Document 111

Filed 06/14/10 Page 13 of 24

Case 2:10-cv-01061-JWS Document 111

Filed 06/14/10 Page 14 of 24

Case 2:10-cv-01061-JWS Document 111

Filed 06/14/10 Page 15 of 24

Case 2:10-cv-01061-JWS Document 111

Filed 06/14/10 Page 16 of 24

Case 2:10-cv-01061-JWS Document 111

Filed 06/14/10 Page 17 of 24

Case 2:10-cv-01061-JWS Document 111

Filed 06/14/10 Page 18 of 24

Case 2:10-cv-01061-JWS Document 111

Filed 06/14/10 Page 19 of 24

Case 2:10-cv-01061-JWS Document 111

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

Filed 06/14/10 Page 20 of 24

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on June 14, 2010, I electronically transmitted the attached
document to the Clerk’s Office using the CM/ECF System for filing, and transmittal of a
Notice of Electronic Filing to the following ECF registrants:
Mary R. O’Grady
Solicitor General
Christopher A. Munns
Assistant Attorney General
1275 West Washington Street
Phoenix, Arizona 85007-2997
Telephone: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

Attorneys for proposed DefendantIntervenor State of Arizona

Steven A. LaMar
Senior Litigation Counsel
Isaiah Fields
Assistant Attorney General
1275 West Washington Street
Phoenix, Arizona 85007
Telephone: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

Attorneys for proposed DefendantIntervenor State of Arizona

John J. Bouma (#001358)
Robert A. Henry (#015104)
Joseph G. Adams (#018210)
SNELL & WILMER L.L.P.
One Arizona Center
400 E. Van Buren
Phoenix, AZ 85004-2202
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

Attorneys for proposed DefendantIntervenor Janice K. Brewer,
Governor of The State of Arizona

Joseph A. Kanefield (#015838)
Office of Governor Janice K. Brewer
1700 W. Washington, 9th Floor
Phoenix, AZ 85007
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]

Attorneys for proposed DefendantIntervenor Janice K. Brewer,
Governor of The State of Arizona

27
28
-1-

Case 2:10-cv-01061-JWS Document 111

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

Filed 06/14/10 Page 21 of 24

Lance B. Payette
Attorneys for Defendants Bradley
Deputy County Attorney
Carlyon and Kelly Clark
Navajo County Attorney’s Office
P. 0. Box 668
Holbrook, AZ 86025-0668
Telephone: [phone]
[e-mail]
Jean E. Wilcox
Deputy County Attorney
110 E. Cherry Avenue
Flagstaff, AZ 86001-4627
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]

Attorneys for Defendants Coconino
County Attorney and Coconino County
Sheriff

Bruce P. White
Attorneys for Defendant Richard M.
Anne C. Longo
Romley, Maricopa County Attorney
Deputy County Attorneys
CIVIL DIVISION
Security Center Building
222 North Central Avenue, Suite 1100
Phoenix, AZ 85004-2206
Telephone: [phone]
[e-mail]
Michael W. McCarthy
Chief Deputy County Attorney
P.O. Box 1717
Clifton, AZ 85533
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]

Attorneys for Defendant Derek Rapier,
Greenlee County Attorney; Steven
Tucker, Greenlee County Sheriff

Jack H. Fields
Deputy Yavapai County Attorney
Yavapai County Attorney’s Office
255 E. Gurley Street
Prescott, AZ 86301
Telephone: [phone]
[e-mail]

Attorneys Defendants Sheila Polk,
Yavapai County Attorney; Steve Waugh
Yavapai County Sheriff

Chris M. Roll
Chief Civil Attorney
Joe Albo
Deputy County Attorney
P.O. Box 887
Florence, AZ 85132
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

Attorneys for Defendants James P.
Walsh, Pinal County Attorney; Paul
Babeu, Pinal County Sheriff

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-

Case 2:10-cv-01061-JWS Document 111

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

Filed 06/14/10 Page 22 of 24

George J. Romero
Office of the Yuma County Attorney
Civil Division
250 W. 2nd Street, Suite G
Yuma, Arizona, AZ 85364
Telephone: [phone]
[e-mail]

Attorneys for Defendants Jon A. Smith,
Yuma County Attorney; Ralph Ogden,
Yuma County Sheriff

Daniel Jurkowitz
Deputy County Attorney
32 North Stone Avenue, Suite 2100
Tucson, AZ 95701
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

Attorneys for Defendants Pima County
Attorney Barbara LaWall; Pima
County Sheriff Clarence W. Dupnik

10

[e-mail]

11

Attorneys for Defendant Sheriff Joseph
Thomas P. Liddy
M. Arpaio
Maria R. Brandon
Maricopa County
Office of Special Litigation Services
234 North Central Avenue, Suite 4400
Phoenix, AZ 85004
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

R. Glenn Buckelew
Deputy La Paz County Attorney
CIVIL DIVISION
1008 Hopi Avenue
Parker, AZ 85344
Telephone: [phone]
[e-mail]

Attorneys for Defendants Sam
Vederman, La Paz County Attorney;
Donald Lowery, La Paz County Sheriff

Joseph D. Young
Apache County Attorney’s Office
P.O. Box 637
St. Johns, AZ 85936
Telephone: [phone]
[e-mail]

Attorneys for Defendants Michael B.
Whiting, Apache County Attorney, in
his official capacity; and Joseph
Dedman, Jr., Apache County Sheriff, in
his official capacity

27
28
-3-

Case 2:10-cv-01061-JWS Document 111

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

Filed 06/14/10 Page 23 of 24

Christopher B. Dupont
Trautman Dupont PLC
1726 North Seventh Street
Phoenix, AZ 85006
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]

Attorneys for Amicus Curiae Legal
Momentum

Joanna S. McCallum
Gregory N. Pimstone
Ronald G. Blum
Lydia Mendoza
Sirena Castillo
Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP
11355 W. Olympic Boulevard
Los Angeles, CA 90064
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

Attorneys for Amicus Curiae Legal
Momentum

I hereby certify that on June 14, 2010, I served the attached document by U.S. Mail
on the following, who are not registered participants of the CM/ECF System:
Mr. Kenny Angle
Graham County Attorney
800 West Main Street
Safford, AZ 85546

Mr. Preston Allred
c/o Legal Liaison
Graham County Sheriff
523 10th Avenue
Safford, AZ 85546

Mr. John R. Armer
c/o Legal Liaison
Gila County Sheriff
1400 East Ash Street
Globe, AZ 85501

Mr. Larry A. Dever
c/o Legal Liaison
Cochise County Sheriff
205 North Judd Drive
Bisbee, AZ 85603

Ms. Daisy Flores
Gila County Attorney
1400 East Ash Street
Globe, AZ 85501

Mr. Tony Estrada
c/o Legal Liaison
Santa Cruz County Sheriff
1250 N. Hohokam Drive
Nogales, AZ 85621

26
27
28
-4-

Case 2:10-cv-01061-JWS Document 111

1
2
3
4
5

Filed 06/14/10 Page 24 of 24

Mr. Tom Sheahan
c/o Legal Liaison
Mohave County Sheriff
600 W. Beale Street
Kingman, AZ 86402

Mr. Edward G. Rheinheimer
Cochise County Attorney
150 Quality Hill Road, 2nd Floor
Bisbee, AZ 85603

Mr. Matthew J. Smith
Mohave County Attorney
315 North 4th Street
Kingman, AZ 86401

Mr. George Silva
Santa Cruz County Attorney
2150 North Congress Drive, Suite 201
Nogales, AZ 85621

6
7

/s/Robyn E. Bird
Robyn E. Bird

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-5-

Case 2:10-cv-01061-JWS Document 111-1

Filed 06/14/10 Page 1 of 7

Case 2:10-cv-01061-JWS Document 111-1

Filed 06/14/10 Page 2 of 7

Case 2:10-cv-01061-JWS Document 111-1

Filed 06/14/10 Page 3 of 7

Case 2:10-cv-01061-JWS Document 111-1

Filed 06/14/10 Page 4 of 7

Case 2:10-cv-01061-JWS Document 111-1

Filed 06/14/10 Page 5 of 7

Case 2:10-cv-01061-JWS Document 111-1

Filed 06/14/10 Page 6 of 7

Case 2:10-cv-01061-JWS Document 111-1

Filed 06/14/10 Page 7 of 7

Exhibit C

Case 2:10-cv-01413-NVW Document 6-3

Filed 07/06/10 Page 2 of 10

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
Plaintiff,
Civil Action No.
v.
THE STATE OF ARIZONA, et al..

Defendants.

DECLARATION OF DAVID C. PALMATIER
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1746 , 1, David C. Palmatier, declare and state as follows:

1. I am the Unit Chief for the Law Enforcement Support Center (LESC) within U.S.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), an agency within the Department of Homeland
Security (DHS). I have served in this position since March 16, 2008. Prior to my current
position, I served as the Assistant Special Agent in Charge in Boston, Massachusetts, from
December 2005 to March 2008. Prior to that, I served as the Director of the Office of
Investigations Training Division from November 2000 to December 2005. I make this
declaration based on personal knowledge of the subject matter acquired by me in the course of
the performance of my official duties. I am aware that the State of Arizona has enacted new
immigration legislation, known as Senate Bill 1070 (SB 1070), and I have read and reviewed SB
1070 as amended.

2. The purpose of my declaration is to describe the adverse effects of Arizona SB
1070 on the LESC's ability to respond, supervise, and monitor requests from law enforcement

Case 2:10-cv-01413-NVW Document 6-3

Filed 07/06/10 Page 3 of 10

partners in an effort to provide accurate and timely alien status determinations for subjects
arrested or under investigation.
3. As the LESC Unit Chief. I have direct managerial and supervisory authority over
all sections that comprise the LESC, including three Operations Sections, the National Crime
Information Center (NCIC) Section, the Communications Center Section, the Tip-line Section,
the Training Section, and the Administration Section. The Operations Sections respond to
requests for alien status determinations sent to the LESC via computer. The NCIC Section enters
and validates all ICE lookout records in the NCIC computer system for immigration absconders
(those who have been ordered removed but have absconded), previously deported aggravated
felons, and fugitives sought for criminal violations of customs and immigration laws investigated
by ICE. The Communications Center Section responds to phone requests for information and
assistance by our state, local, and federal law enforcement partners. The Tip-line Section
handles phone tips from the public relating to the full range of crimes enforced by DHS. The
Training Section provides basic and advanced training to LESC employees. The Administration
Section provides personnel, budget, and logistical support for the LESC.
4. The LESC also responds to FBI requests for alien status determinations on nonU.S. citizens seeking to purchase firearms; responds to U.S. Secret Service alien status
determinations for aliens seeking access to a protected area (e.g., the White House Complex);
and responds to alien status determinations related to employment issues at national security
related locations that could be vulnerable to sabotage, attack, or exploitation.
5. Congress established the LESC to provide alien status determination support to
federal, state, and local law enforcement on a 24-hours-a-day, seven-days-a-week basis. The
enabling legislation is codified in 8 U.S.C. §§ 1226(d)(1)(A) & 1252 Note.

2

Case 2:10-cv-01413-NVW Document 6-3

Filed 07/06/10 Page 4 of 10

6. The core mission of the LESC is to receive and respond to Immigration Alien
Queries (IAQ) from law enforcement partners in an effort to provide accurate and timely alien
status determinations for subjects arrested or under investigation. Biographic queries are routed
to the LESC via the International Justice and Public Safety Information Sharing Network
(N LETS). Biometric queries are routed to the LESC via state information bureaus and the FBI
Criminal Justice Information Services (CJIS). Both biographic and biometric queries are sent
and received via computer systems. Queries contain basic information such as name, date of
birth, place of birth, sex, and other identifying information. LESC Law Enforcement Specialists
query as many as ten DHS, FBI, and Interpol databases in order to produce a written alien status
determination for the requesting agency.

7. Like other components within DHS, the LESC prioritizes its efforts in order to
focus on criminal aliens and those most likely to pose a potential threat to their communities.
For example, criminal violations of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) are given priority
over administrative violations. The goal is to invest our finite resources on the criminals who
pose the largest threat to public safety or national security risks. In addition, LESC supervisors
monitor incoming requests for information and prioritize those that are time sensitive, such as
roadside traffic stops and subjects that are about to be released from police custody. The LESC
also conducts "enhanced responses" for IAQs that are associated with crimes such as murder,
sexual assault, terrorism, gang-related crimes, and other serious crimes. As a general practice,
IAQs are processed in the order they are received at the LESC. Older queries are generally
completed before work is completed on new queries. However, there are exceptions made in an
effort to respond to time-sensitive queries and those queries that involve serious offenders; one
example, listed above, would be traffic stops, where a highway patrolman has a limited amount

3

Case 2:10-cv-01413-NVW Document 6-3

Filed 07/06/10 Page 5 of 10

of time to detain a suspected illegal alien. Likewise, illegal aliens arrested for serious crimes
such as homicide are made a priority in the queue if the subject will be released on bail or bond.
This prioritization ensures that aliens arrested for particularly serious or violent crimes are not
released into the general public if LESC's verification allows for the further detention of the
alien. But the two priorities (responding on illegal aliens arrested for particularly serious crimes
and responding to time sensitive inquiries, such as traffic stops) compete with each other,
meaning that a surge in time-sensitive inquiries from the enforcement of the Arizona law will
adversely affect responses regarding aliens arrested for particularly serious crimes. Additionally,
the LESC has several queues that allow for the prioritization of queries based upon originating
agency. Examples of unique queues include interoperability queries based upon fingerprints,
biographical queries sent via NLETS, and Brady Act queries for firearms purchasers. The LESC
does not currently have the ability to separate queries from Arizona as they arrive. Furthermore.
creating an Arizona queue would not prioritize queries based upon the risk posed by the violator
or the seriousness of the charge. Separating data in that manner is not currently possible using
the data fields provided in the current IAQ formatted messages
8. Currently. the average query waits for approximately 70 minutes before a Law

Enforcement Specialist is available to work on the request. On average, it takes an additional 11
minutes per query to research DHS data systems and to provide the written alien status
determination.
9. Over the years, the LESC has experienced continuous and dramatic increases in
alien status determination queries. IAQs from fiscal year (FY) 2007 to date were:
FY 2007 727,903
FY 2008 807,106
FY 2009 1,064,261
FY 2010 726,275 (through May 31, 2010)

4

Case 2:10-cv-01413-NVW Document 6-3

Filed 07/06/10 Page 6 of 10

10. From FY 08 to FY 09, the LESC had a 20% increase in the number of IAQs.
Although FY 10 is not over yet, LESC personnel project there will be at least a 10% increase in
IAQs from FY 09 to FY 10.
11. The internal LESC computer system (ACRIMe) is dynamically updated as
records are added or deleted. ACRIMe alien status determination records are retained for 75
years. Law Enforcement Specialists also access approximately six to ten other federal databases,
depending on the circumstances regarding the subject, in order to determine alien status. The
ACRIMe computer system randomly selects approximately 5% of all alien status determination
responses for quality assurance. Quality assurance reviews determine if the search protocols
were followed and if the correct status determination was made. LESC employees do not
typically review alien files in order to provide alien status determinations. If an alien file review
is required, that review will have to be completed by the ICE field office, and depending on the
physical location of the alien file, the review may take two days or more.
12. Many U.S. citizens, if queried through the LESC, result in a "no match" response
to the requesting agency, meaning that the Law Enforcement Specialist was unable to locate any
records or prior encounters in the DHS databases queried. However, to arrive at the no match
response for U.S. citizens requires the same level of investment in staffing resources to
determine the subject is a no match. And, notably, a "no match" response would not guarantee
that the subject of the search was an American citizen-it would simply reflect an absence of
records in the LESC system.
13. The LESC has 153 Law Enforcement Specialists (LES) assigned to respond to
IAQs from all partner agencies. If queries come to the LESC in a consistent and steady manner,

5

Case 2:10-cv-01413-NVW Document 6-3

Filed 07/06/10 Page 7 of 10

a fully trained and experienced LES can process approximately 10,000 IAQs per year. Based on
current LES staffing, the LESC theoretically has the capacity to handle approximately 1.5
million IAQs per year. However, the number of queries that come to the LESC at any given time
is not consistent. This makes it difficult to predict and staff in a manner that accounts for
temporary spikes in activity. On a weekly basis, the LESC experiences activity spikes that
require the use of overtime in order to handle the incoming IAQs from LESC partners. In
addition, personnel from other LESC sections are routinely diverted from other critical missions
to deal with IAQ activity spikes.
14. The LESC also performs a significant role in supporting the ICE Secure
Communities Program by producing alien status determinations based on biometric (fingerprint)
booking information. Secure Communities was created to improve, modernize, and prioritize
ICE's efforts to identify and remove criminal aliens from the United States. Secure
Communities arranges for willing jurisdictions to access biometric technology so they can
simultaneously check a person's criminal and immigration history when the person is charged
criminally. Once illegal aliens are identified, ICE must then determine how to proceed and
whether to lodge a detainer or otherwise pursue the alien's detention and removal from the
United States upon the alien's release from criminal custody. ICE first deployed the technology
in October of 2008, and as of June 8. 2010, has deployed it to 281 jurisdictions. ICE plans to
deploy the technology nationwide to more than 3,000 jurisdictions by the end of FY 2013. The
LESC has already experienced an increase in processing times since the establishment of the
Secure Communities Program due to the receipt of extensive criminal records and previous DHS
encounters with more serious criminal aliens. As our support for Secure Communities continues
to grow, we anticipate an increased workload due to the need for more complex queries that will

6

Case 2:10-cv-01413-NVW Document 6-3

Filed 07/06/10 Page 8 of 10

further increase LESC response times. Thus, the expansion of the Secure Communities Program
alone will likely utilize much of the capacity of the LESC.
15. In my professional judgment, Arizona SB 1070 will inevitably result in a
significant increase in the number of IAQs. The LESC processed just over 1,000,000 IAQs in
FY 09. According to the FBI Criminal Justice Information Services (CJIS), in FY 09 criminal
justice agencies in Arizona submitted 563,474 arrest records to CJIS, but just over 80,000 IAQs
originated from all agencies within the state of Arizona in FY 09. Thus. Arizona SB 1070's
requirement that "[a]ny person who is arrested shall have the person's immigration status
determined before the person is released" could, by itself, dramatically increase the LESC's
workload. Moreover, because Arizona's law calls for status verifications for lawful stopswhether or not such stops result in an arrest-the number of IAQ's will increase dramatically. If
even a small percentage of these stops, detentions, and arrests lead to new IAQs, the LESC will
be forced to process thousands of additional IAQs annually. Moreover, Arizona's new law will
result in an increase in the number of U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents being queried
through the LESC, reducing our ability to provide timely responses to law enforcement on
serious criminal aliens.
16. This increase in queries from Arizona will delay response times for all IAQs and
risks exceeding the capacity of the LESC to respond to higher priority requests for criminal alien
status determinations from law enforcement partners nationwide. Furthermore, the potential
increase in queries by Arizona along with the possibility of other states adopting similar
legislation could overwhelm the system.

17. If the LESC's capacity to respond to requests for assistance is exceeded, the initial
impact would be delays in responding to time-sensitive inquiries from state, local, and federal

7

Case 2:10-cv-01413-NVW Document 6-3

Filed 07/06/10 Page 9 of 10

law enforcement, meaning that very serious violators may well escape scrutiny and be released
before the LESC can respond to police and inform them of the serious nature of the illegal alien
they have encountered. If delays continue to increase at the LESC. ICE might have to divert
personnel from other critical missions to serve the needs of our law enforcement partners. The
LESC directly supports both the public safety and national security missions of DHS. These are
critical missions which cannot be allowed to fail.
18. I expect no increase in LESC resources in terms of personnel. As such, I
anticipate an increase in inquiries will slow response times for inquiries without respect to the
priority level of the subject in question. Based on my professional experience, slower response
times result in an increased likelihood that the subject of an inquiry, including subjects who are
high-priority, will be released, potentially resulting in the commission of additional violent
crimes. greater difficulty in locating the alien to initiate removal proceedings, and further
impediments to ICE's ability to efficiently obtain removal orders and remove criminal aliens
from the United States.
19. It is important to note that LESC's responses to IAQs do not always provide a
definitive answer as to an alien's immigration status. Indeed, almost 10,000 of the 80,000 IAQs
the LESC processed from Arizona in FY 2009 resulted in an indeterminate answer (for
comparison, just over 15,000 of the IAQs from Arizona in FY 2009 resulted in a response of
lawful presence). Moreover, a U.S. citizen, when queried through the LESC, would likely be
returned with a "no match" response. Many-if not most-U.S. citizens have no records
contained in the databases available to the LESC. Experience has demonstrated that some police
officers are confused in these types of situations and sometimes want to detain the suspected

8

Case 2:10-cv-01413-NVW Document 6-3

Filed 07/06/10 Page 10 of 10

illegal alien (actually a U.S. citizen) until they can call the LESC or their local ICE field office to
confirm the subject's immigration status.
20. This declaration has focused on the impact of SB 1070 on the LESC system. If
other populous states adopted similar laws, the LESC would be unable to respond to inquiries in
a time frame which would be useful to law enforcement needs.
21. 1 declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct to the best
of my knowledge and belief. Executed the 28th day of June, 2010 in Williston, Vermont.

David C. Palmatier
Unit Chief
Law Enforcement Support Center

9

Exhibit D

Governor Herbert Issues Statement on Illegal Immigration Reform in Utah |...

1 of 2

http://www.utah.gov/governor/news_media/article.html?article=3368

Skip Navigation
Search all of Utah.gov »

Home
About Governor Herbert
News & Media
Priorities
Staff
Cabinet
Offices
Contact
Home
News & Media
Story Details

Governor Herbert Issues Statement on Illegal Immigration Reform in Utah
Aug 13 2010
SALT LAKE CITY - Governor Gary R. Herbert has issued the following statement regarding the illegal
immigration reform legislation released by Rep. Stephen Sandstrom:
"In Utah, we will have strong and meaningful illegal immigration reform - a 'Utah solution' that focuses on
security, public safety and protecting taxpayer interests, while also recognizing the very real human side of
this issue. Absent any meaningful leadership from the federal government on this issue, individual states are
being forced to take up the charge.
The bill released today by Rep. Sandstrom is a good starting point to further public discussion on the issue of
illegal immigration reform in Utah. I look forward to other proposals that I expect to come forward leading up
to the 2011 legislative session.
I have outlined six guiding principles that should be inherent in Utah's efforts. Simply, these are: respect for
the law; the federal government must take responsibility; private sector accountability; respect for the
humanity of all people; efforts must be fair, colorblind and race-neutral; law enforcement must have
appropriate tools; and relieve the burden on taxpayers."
The full text of Governor Herbert's immigration reform guiding principles, as well as comments from his July
20, 2010, roundtable discussion on immigration is available online at http://www.utah.gov/governor
/news_media/article.html?article=3318.

Related Stories
Governor Herbert to Host Roundtable Discussion on Immigration Reform
Governor Herbert Signs Immigration Reform Legislation
Governor Gary R. Herbert Immigration Roundtable Remarks July 20, 2010

5/2/2011 12:23 PM

Governor Herbert Issues Statement on Illegal Immigration Reform in Utah |...

2 of 2

http://www.utah.gov/governor/news_media/article.html?article=3368

Governor Herbert to lead Immigration Reform Summit
Governor Issues Statement Regarding Congressman's Letter to U.S. Attorney General
If you found this news piece interesting, please consider sharing it through your social network.

Search

Press Releases and Advisories
News Advisories
News Releases

Media Contacts
Ally Isom
Deputy Chief of Staff
Office: [phone]
Mobile: [phone]
Brian Somers
Associate Director of Communications
Office: [phone]
Mobile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

Subscriptions
RSS feed for News Releases
RSS feed for News Advisories
RSS feed for both News Releases & News Advisories
Follow announcements on Twitter
Utah.gov Home | Utah.gov Terms of Use | Utah.gov Privacy Policy | Utah.gov Accessibility Policy | Translate Utah.gov
Copyright © 2010 State of Utah - All rights reserved.

5/2/2011 12:23 PM

Exhibit E

STATEMENT BY THE EMBASSY OF MEXICO ON LAWSUIT FILE...

1 of 1

http://embamex.sre.gob.mx/usa/index.php/home/13-press-releases-2011/5...

DIRECTORY | CONTACT US | ESPAÑOL

buscar...

Home

STATEMENT BY THE EMBASSY OF MEXICO ON LAWSUIT FILED AGAINST HB 497 IN UTAH

About the Embassy

Martes, 03 de Mayo de 2011 18:59

Search
Featured Links
México
Comunicados de Prensa

About Mexico

Washington D.C.

Consular Services

May 3rd, 2011

Ambassador

Transparencia
Becas
Guía del Viajero

Press Office
Contact Us

STATEMENT BY THE EMBASSY OF MEXICO ON LAWSUIT FILED AGAINST HB 497 IN UTAH

Gobierno de México

Cultural Institute

Vive México

The Embassy of Mexico welcomes the lawsuit filed in District Court today by several civil society
organizations against HB 497, a bill recently passed in the state of Utah. On March 16th the Embassy
expressed its concern regarding certain provisions of this law that could adversely affect the civil
rights of Mexican nationals living in Utah, further criminalize immigrants and may lead for the
selective application of the law.
The Embassy reiterates that Utah’s actions on this specific issue are detrimental to the robust
relationship that Mexico and the United States have built as partners and neighbors in such important
issues as enhancing economic competitiveness and trade, cooperating against transnational organized

Files

crime, promoting clean energy and combating climate change, and creating a more modern and
efficient border. As has unfortunately been the case in other states in this country, where similar bills
have been enacted, the Government of Mexico is concerned about the adverse impact initiatives such

Vive México

as Utah’s HB 497 may have on the breadth and scope of our bilateral relationship.
Therefore, the Embassy of Mexico and its consular network in the United States will continue to
promote a clear understanding of the positive contributions our nationals make to the communities
they live in this country and will spare no effort to protect their fundamental rights regardless of their

Calendar of events
«<

immigration status.

L

M X

J

V

S

1

2

3

5

6

7

8

Liquidation of Luz y
Fuerza del Centro

Hits

Mayo 2011 > »

D

Mexico and the fight
against drug-traffiking and
organized crime

Ver contenido por hits :
122835
Ligas al Gobierno
de México

9 10 11 12 13 14

4

*

*

*

15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31 1

2

3

4

SRE - Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores México, Sitio Web: http://www.sre.gob.mx

5/4/2011 6:02 PM

Exhibit F

Exhibit G

Policy Number: 10072.1

Office of the Assistant Secretary

FEA Number: 601-14
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
500 12th Street, SW
Washington, D.C. 20536

MEMORANDUM FOR:

All ICE Employees

FROM:

John Morton
Assistant Secretary

SUBJECT:

Civil Immigration Enforcement: Priorities for the Apprehension,
Detention, and Removal of Aliens

Purpose
This memorandum outlines the civil immigration enforcement priorities of U.S. Immigration and
Customs Enforcement (ICE) as they relate to the apprehension, detention, and removal of aliens.
These priorities shall apply across all ICE programs and shall inform enforcement activity,
detention decisions, budget requests and execution, and strategic planning.
A. Priorities for the apprehension, detention, and removal of aliens
In addition to our important criminal investigative responsibilities, ICE is charged with enforcing
the nation’s civil immigration laws. This is a critical mission and one with direct significance for
our national security, public safety, and the integrity of our border and immigration controls.
ICE, however, only has resources to remove approximately 400,000 aliens per year, less than 4
percent of the estimated illegal alien population in the United States. In light of the large number
of administrative violations the agency is charged with addressing and the limited enforcement
resources the agency has available, ICE must prioritize the use of its enforcement personnel,
detention space, and removal resources to ensure that the removals the agency does conduct
promote the agency’s highest enforcement priorities, namely national security, public safety, and
border security.
To that end, the following shall constitute ICE’s civil enforcement priorities, with the first being
the highest priority and the second and third constituting equal, but lower, priorities.
Priority 1. Aliens who pose a danger to national security or a risk to public safety
The removal of aliens who pose a danger to national security or a risk to public safety shall be
ICE’s highest immigration enforcement priority. These aliens include, but are not limited to:

AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 10062989. (Posted 06/29/10)
www.ice.gov

Civil Immigration Enforcement: Priorities for the Apprehension, Detention, and Removal of
Aliens
Page 2






aliens engaged in or suspected of terrorism or espionage, or who otherwise pose a danger
to national security;
aliens convicted of crimes, with a particular emphasis on violent criminals, felons, and
repeat offenders;
aliens not younger than 16 years of age who participated in organized criminal gangs;
aliens subject to outstanding criminal warrants; and
aliens who otherwise pose a serious risk to public safety.1

For purposes of prioritizing the removal of aliens convicted of crimes, ICE personnel should
refer to the following new offense levels defined by the Secure Communities Program, with
Level 1 and Level 2 offenders receiving principal attention. These new Secure Communities
levels are given in rank order and shall replace the existing Secure Communities levels of
offenses.2
 Level 1 offenders: aliens convicted of “aggravated felonies,” as defined in § 101(a)(43)
of the Immigration and Nationality Act,3 or two or more crimes each punishable by more
than one year, commonly referred to as “felonies”;
 Level 2 offenders: aliens convicted of any felony or three or more crimes each punishable
by less than one year, commonly referred to as “misdemeanors”; and
 Level 3 offenders: aliens convicted of crimes punishable by less than one year.4
Priority 2. Recent illegal entrants
In order to maintain control at the border and at ports of entry, and to avoid a return to the prior
practice commonly and historically referred to as “catch and release,” the removal of aliens who
have recently violated immigration controls at the border, at ports of entry, or through the
knowing abuse of the visa and visa waiver programs shall be a priority.
Priority 3. Aliens who are fugitives or otherwise obstruct immigration controls
In order to ensure the integrity of the removal and immigration adjudication processes, the
removal of aliens who are subject to a final order of removal and abscond, fail to depart, or
intentionally obstruct immigration controls, shall be a priority. These aliens include:
1

This provision is not intended to be read broadly, and officers, agents, and attorneys should rely on this provision

only when serious and articulable public safety issues exist.

2
The new levels should be used immediately for purposes of enforcement operations. DRO will work with Secure

Communities and the Office of the Chief Information Officer to revise the related computer coding by October 1,

2010.

3
As the definition of “aggravated felony” includes serious, violent offenses and less serious, non-violent offenses,

agents, officers, and attorneys should focus particular attention on the most serious of the aggravated felonies when

prioritizing among level one offenses.

4
Some misdemeanors are relatively minor and do not warrant the same degree of focus as others. ICE agents and

officers should exercise particular discretion when dealing with minor traffic offenses such as driving without a

license.

AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 10062989. (Posted 06/29/10)

Civil Immigration Enforcement: Priorities for the Apprehension, Detention, and Removal of
Aliens
Page 3
 fugitive aliens, in descending priority as follows:5
o fugitive aliens who pose a danger to national security;
o fugitives aliens convicted of violent crimes or who otherwise pose a threat to the
community;
o fugitive aliens with criminal convictions other than a violent crime;
o fugitive aliens who have not been convicted of a crime;
 aliens who reenter the country illegally after removal, in descending priority as follows:
o previously removed aliens who pose a danger to national security;
o previously removed aliens convicted of violent crimes or who otherwise pose a
threat to the community;
o previously removed aliens with criminal convictions other than a violent crime;
o previously removed aliens who have not been convicted of a crime; and
 aliens who obtain admission or status by visa, identification, or immigration benefit
fraud.6
The guidance to the National Fugitive Operations Program: Priorities, Goals and Expectations,
issued on December 8, 2009, remains in effect and shall continue to apply for all purposes,
including how Fugitive Operation Teams allocate resources among fugitive aliens, previously
removed aliens, and criminal aliens.
B. Apprehension, detention, and removal of other aliens unlawfully in the United States
Nothing in this memorandum should be construed to prohibit or discourage the apprehension,
detention, or removal of other aliens unlawfully in the United States. ICE special agents,
officers, and attorneys may pursue the removal of any alien unlawfully in the United States,
although attention to these aliens should not displace or disrupt the resources needed to remove
aliens who are a higher priority. Resources should be committed primarily to advancing the
priorities set forth above in order to best protect national security and public safety and to secure
the border.
C. Detention
As a general rule, ICE detention resources should be used to support the enforcement priorities
noted above or for aliens subject to mandatory detention by law. Absent extraordinary
circumstances or the requirements of mandatory detention, field office directors should not
expend detention resources on aliens who are known to be suffering from serious physical or
mental illness, or who are disabled, elderly, pregnant, or nursing, or demonstrate that they are
5

Some fugitives may fall into both this priority and priority 1.

ICE officers and special agents should proceed cautiously when encountering aliens who may have engaged in

fraud in an attempt to enter but present themselves without delay to the authorities and indicate a fear of persecution

or torture. See Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, art. 31, opened for signature July 28, 1951, 19 U.S.T.

6259, 189 U.N.T.S. 137. In such instances, officers and agents should contact their local Office of the Chief

Counsel.

6

AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 10062989. (Posted 06/29/10)

Civil Immigration Enforcement: Priorities for the Apprehension, Detention, and Removal of
Aliens
Page 4
primary caretakers of children or an infirm person, or whose detention is otherwise not in the
public interest. To detain aliens in those categories who are not subject to mandatory detention,
ICE officers or special agents must obtain approval from the field office director. If an alien falls
within the above categories and is subject to mandatory detention, field office directors are
encouraged to contact their local Office of Chief Counsel for guidance.
D. Prosecutorial discretion
The rapidly increasing number of criminal aliens who may come to ICE’s attention heightens the
need for ICE employees to exercise sound judgment and discretion consistent with these
priorities when conducting enforcement operations, making detention decisions, making
decisions about release on supervision pursuant to the Alternatives to Detention Program, and
litigating cases. Particular care should be given when dealing with lawful permanent residents,
juveniles, and the immediate family members of U.S. citizens. Additional guidance on
prosecutorial discretion is forthcoming. In the meantime, ICE officers and attorneys should
continue to be guided by the November 17, 2000 prosecutorial discretion memorandum from
then-INS Commissioner Doris Meissner; the October 24, 2005 Memorandum from Principal
Legal Advisor William Howard; and the November 7, 2007 Memorandum from then-Assistant
Secretary Julie Myers.
E. Implementation
ICE personnel shall follow the priorities set forth in this memorandum immediately. Further,
ICE programs shall develop appropriate measures and methods for recording and evaluating their
effectiveness in implementing the priorities. As this may require updates to data tracking
systems and methods, ICE will ensure that reporting capabilities for these priorities allow for
such reporting as soon as practicable, but not later than October 1, 2010.

AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 10062989. (Posted 06/29/10)