Critics Say the Bill Directly Attacks Teller County’s 287g Agreement with ICE on Immigration Detention
Immigration has become a hot topic in places all across the country in the last few years. Even though Colorado is not a border state it still sees its share of immigrant activity, which can be proved by the recent influx of immigrants getting bused to cities like Denver from areas close to the border.
As immigration increases in the state, one bill has come forth that would restrict how local and state governments can work with federal immigration enforcement agencies when it comes to detaining illegal immigrants.
If passed, House Bill 23-1100, called “Restrict Government Involvement In Immigration Detention,” would make it illegal for any local government within the state to contract with the federal government for facilities that detain illegal immigrants for civil immigration matters.
The bill has already passed in the House after three readings and it made it to the State Senate where it was assigned to the Judiciary Committee.
Proponents of the bill say that taxpayer dollars should not be used to detain people for civil matters like expired visas. However, Teller County representatives say this bill is yet another attempt to attack the county’s ICE agreement after lawsuits from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) have failed.
ACLU’s Fight Against Teller County’s ICE Agreement
The court battle between Teller County and the ACLU started in 2018 when the ACLU filed a lawsuit against Teller County after they held a suspect that was arrested for a minor gaming violation on an ICE hold. A judge ruled in favor of Teller County saying that they had held the suspect lawfully. However, that same year a judge ruled against El Paso County in a lawsuit filed by the ACLU when it refused to release someone due to an immigration hold.
After the county won the lawsuit, the sheriff entered into a 287g partnership in 2019 to aid his deputies in conducting ICE holds and working with the agency with immigration procedures. That same year, the state passed a bill called “Protect Colorado Residents From Federal Government Overreach.” The bill was aimed at preventing law enforcement agencies from entering agreements with ICE and detaining people on immigration holds after they have posted bonds.
The ACLU then filed another lawsuit against the county naming six residents that claimed the ICE agreement went against the new law and the Colorado and U.S. Constitutions. In 2020, a district court judge threw out the lawsuit saying that taxpayers didn’t have legal grounds to sue because the jail was operating as a free enterprise and was not using money from taxpayers for the detention center or the ICE partnership.
The ACLU then appealed the judge’s ruling and the Colorado Court of Appeals sent the case back to the district court in 2022. Earlier this year, the district judge once again ruled in Teller County’s favor saying that their agreement with ICE was legal. But, the county’s victory could be short-lived if HB 23-100 passes this year.
What Will the Proposed Bill Do?
Currently, ICE can contract out a certain amount of its detention capacity to state and local governments that can then subcontract with immigration dentation facilities that are run by private entities to detain individuals for federal civil immigration purposes. If passed, the bill would make any contracts between a local or state government agency and detention centers illegal after Jan. 1, 2024.
The law would prohibit selling any government property for the purpose of establishing an immigration detention facility owned by a private entity. Governments would also not be allowed to pay costs related to a detention facility or receive any payment related to the detention of individuals in an immigration facility.
Proponents Say Detention Facility Should Not Be Paid by Taxpayers
According to Rep. Naquetta Ricks, a Democrat who represents Arapahoe County, the bill is good for Colorado and other states have been looking at similar measures. She said she decided to sponsor the bill after she was approached last year and she decided it was a good move for the state.
“The aim of this bill is to stop the detention of undocumented immigrants in Colorado, prohibiting agreements with ICE and local governments, sheriff’s departments, etc.,” Ricks said. “It is an issue of fairness, freedom, and opportunity. People are deprived of their liberty. They are separated from their loved ones and put at risk in ICE custody. I want to be clear that this is for civil matters. It has nothing to do with anyone who is involved in the criminal system or has committed criminal acts against the United States, in Colorado or anywhere.”
Ricks said that immigration detention is a federal matter, but ICE uses contracts with local governments for detention centers to further their reach over the immigration system.
“Our opinion is that our tax dollars need to be used for strengthening our families and communities and not for targeting, detaining, and deporting our immigrant friends, neighbors, and co-workers,” Rep. Ricks explained. “Local communities know what we need and we need to invest our tax dollars into education, housing, great infrastructure, and healthcare programs.”
Ricks said that there are not a lot of counties in the state that have agreements with ICE, but she did hear from the Teller County Sheriff and the county commissioners when they spoke against the bill at the state capitol. “I think the sheriff’s office gets paid about $100 a day to detain each one of these undocumented immigrants, so it’s more of a money-making proposition for them versus them really trying to help,” Ricks said.
Representatives from Teller County Speak Against the Bill as it Makes its Way Through the House
After Teller County Sheriff Jason Mikesell won the lawsuit filed by the ACLU, County Commissioner Dan Williams praised the judge’s decision and promised to fight HB 23-1100 every step of the way.
“This bill is wrong and would mark the first time that the state of Colorado would move to restrict a county government from entering into a legal contract with the federal government to help enforce the law of our land,” Williams stated in an interview. “We have relationships with the DEA, FBI, Federal Marshalls, the Department of Defense, and others and this is a dangerous precedent. Secondly, this bill targets one county, Teller County, and that is not how Colorado has operated in the past and it should not operate that way now despite a well-intentioned legislator’s idea.”
Sheriff Mikesell also produced a video on YouTube explaining why he thinks the bill is a bad move for the state. “Their arguments don’t make any sense, and I hope that logic prevails over some of this stuff,” Mikesell said in the video. “They are making bills and doing all sorts of things to make Colorado more of a sanctuary state. But what they are really creating is more of a lawless epidemic. And then the fact that all of these people are coming here thinking we are a sanctuary state; none of this stops ICE from continuing to arrest people. It just makes it more difficult for local law enforcement to be able to work with ICE to stop these issues from occurring.”
He said that if the bill was passed it would essentially close down the two immigration facilities in the state (one is in Teller County and one is in Aurora).
“When there are no facilities in Colorado for people to be held, they are going to put them in a bus and ship them to another state wherever there is a bed,” Mikesell said. “They then will go before a judge there and be released, but they will be released there. Some of these people are the sole breadwinners for their families. So, all of a sudden now this family doesn’t even know where they are headed because ICE doesn’t know where the beds are at. And now it is going to extend their court period and it is going to create a very big backlog of when they will see a judge and go through these processes. So, it actually hurts these people.”
However, Rep. Ricks said the facility in Aurora would remain open even if the bill passed. She also said that since the bill only applies to civil matters, its passage would only affect a handful of the people the county has detained for ICE matters.
