Inspector General's report says Federal Prisons Detain Inmates in Solitary Confinement for years, decades

From [HERE] and [HERE] Federal prisoners, including those with mental illness, are being kept in solitary confinement for long periods of time in violation of federal policy, according to a new report.

Although the Bureau of Prisons states that it does not practice solitary confinement, the Justice Department inspector general found inmates, including mentally ill prisoners, housed in single-cell confinement for extended periods and “with limited human contact,” the 96-page report said.

The Bureau of Prisons, part of the Justice Department, does not put a limit on the maximum amount of time that inmates can spend in what is known as “restrictive housing.” Inmates, including those with mental illness, may spend years and even decades in these types of cells.

At one prison, investigators found inmates who were confined to their cells for more than 22 hours a day and did not engage in recreation with each other or with other inmates.

“You have no contact, you don’t speak to anybody, and it’s a form of torture on some level,” a psychologist at one prison told the inspector general’s investigators.

In one case, a prisoner had been placed in single-cell confinement for about four years. In another case, a mentally ill inmate was placed in restrictive housing for 1,912 consecutive days, or five years. One mentally ill prisoner was there for six years. Investigators also found a mentally ill inmate who had spent 19 years in a maximum security facility until he was transferred to a residential mental health treatment program.

Click to read more ...

D.A. didn't report that Black Man's semen excluded him as a suspect. He got a 75 yr Sentence for multiple rapes

From [HERE] and [HERE] In early 1993, Lafonso Rollins, a 17-year-old special education student in the ninth grade, was arrested and charged with a series of robberies and rapes of four elderly women who lived in the same public housing complex in a Chicago neighborhood. He had been pointed out to police after a composite sketch was released.

The main evidence against Rollins at trial was his signature on a written confession that detailed the attacks, which included two sexual assaults. Serological testing was also conducted on semen from the crime, and the results should have excluded Rollins as a suspect, but prosecutors did not report the exclusion to defense attorneys. The lab analyst request DNA testing before trial, but forensic supervisors refused to grant testing. Rollins was convicted as an adult, and sentenced to 75 years in prison for the rape of a 78-year-old woman.

Rollins filed for DNA testing and the public defenders were assigned as counsel. In June 2004, the test results excluded Rollins and proved that his confession was false. Further testing was performed on the evidence from the other sexual assault (Rollins was charged with, but not convicted of, this crime). The results again exculpated Rollins and revealed that the same perpetrator had assaulted both victims. Based on these results, the public defenders and prosecutor’s office filed to vacate the conviction.

Rollins was exonerated and walked out of prison without his family to greet him. His mother had been stabbed months before his arrest. While he was in prison, his older sister was shot and killed and both of his grandparents died.

He received $145,837 through the Illinois Court of Claims and pursued a federal civil claim against those who extracted the false confession. In January 2006, the City of Chicago settled Rollins’s claim for $9 million after documents were discovered that revealed improper handling of cases by the Chicago Police Crime Laboratory. [MORE]

Nooses continue to appear at a higher frequency across the country

From [PBS] A U.S. Mint employee was placed on administrative leave after surveillance footage captured the white worker leaving a noose on the factory floor in late June.

The New York Times, following an emailed tip, got in touch with the Mint workers’ union president, who provided more details, including that the white employee had fashioned the noose out of rope used for coin bags on the factory floor. The coin maker then left the loop of rope at the workstation belonging to a black employee. Surveillance video captured the incident mid-afternoon on June 28.

Mint officials said in a statement that there was “absolutely zero tolerance” for this behavior, adding that an internal investigation was underway, CBS Philly reported.

Why it’s important

We’ve seen this year a string of reported cases involving the hangman’s noose, long a racist expression meant to terrorize and intimidate African-Americans.

Many of the reports focused on the nation’s capital, with nooses found at several museums in Washington, D.C., including the Hirshhorn Museum and the National Museum of African American History and Culture. The Times also cited noose sightings in Florida, North Carolina and Maryland in the past few months.

The Times also noted the recent ramped-up activities of the Ku Klux Klan. The racist organization is associated with the noose, a symbol evocative of lynchings and racial terror in the U.S.

Recently, bananas were found hanging from nooses on the campus of American University in Washington, D.C. The racist displays were discovered the same day Taylor Dumpson, 21, started her role as student government president. She’s the first black woman to hold that position in the institution’s history.

Taylor Dumpson described to the Times what happened when she was able to process the moment after days of addressing students’ concerns and media requests.

“I went into a panic mode,” she told the Times. “When there’s a hurricane or a tornado they always tell you to get in a hallway between two walls, crouch down, turn the lights off — that was my immediate reaction. I was concerned for my safety. I closed all the blinds, closed the doors, everything was dark, and I just sat in the hallway crying,” she said.

3 Ways the Senate Health Care Bill Would Devastate Black & Latino Communities

From [HERE] Last August, then-candidate Donald Trump tried to court voters of color by asking, “What the hell do you have to lose?” When it comes to health care, the answer is clear: everything. Senate Republicans are poised to vote for the Better Care Reconciliation Act (BCRA), which would strip coverage, reduce access to care, and cause a spike in premiums for millions of people of color. Trump pledged to “be president for all Americans,” but the plan he endorses will disproportionately hurt people of color while giving a massive tax break to the wealthiest Americans. If he succeeds, thousands of people will die and millions more will suffer. Here are three things you need to know about the Senate health care bill and communities of color.

1. Defunding Planned Parenthood would reduce access to health care for women of color

Planned Parenthood provides health services—such as physicals, cancer screenings, and contraceptive care—to nearly 1 million people of color, and this number is increasing. For example, in the past decade, the number of African American patients increased by 12 percent. Furthermore, according to a recent survey, 1 in 4 Planned Parenthood clients reported that it was the only place they could get the services they need. Without Planned Parenthood health centers, many women of color will be unable to find and receive high-quality, affordable health care.

2. Allowing insurers to charge older Americans five times the premium of a young person while decreasing subsidies with age threatens the well-being of countless people of color

The age tax is an attack on one of society’s most vulnerable populations and will disproportionately hurt people of color. Today, the poverty rate for Asian American seniors is nearly double that of white seniors—7 percent versus 13 percent. For certain Asian American subgroups, such as Cambodian American seniors, poverty rates are as high as 23 percent. African American and Hispanic seniors experience poverty rates of 18 percent and 20 percent, respectively, and according to Demos, “Ninety percent of Latino and 83 percent of African-American seniors have insufficient retirement assets to last through their expected lifespans.” Elderly American Indians and Alaska Natives are already five times more likely to forego medical care due to cost than the average American senior. Forcing the near-elderly to pay significantly more for health insurance would undermine retirement planning and diminish outcomes for people of color.

3. Slashing coverage for millions of Americans risks increased racial disparities in health outcomes

People of color experienced historic increases in coverage under the Affordable Care Act. Between 2013 and 2015 alone, the uninsured rate for Asian, Hispanic, and black populations declined by 7, 9, and 5 percentage points, respectively. However, the Senate health care bill seeks to undo this progress by stripping coverage from 10.6 million people of color in 2022. The effect on coverage would get even worse in 2025, when deeper cuts to Medicaid funding would kick in. People of color make up 58 percent of Medicaid enrollees and suffer disproportionately from a range of health disorders, including asthma, diabetes, and heart disease.  Without health coverage, these families will face impossible decisions and tragic consequences.

If passed, the Senate health care bill would devastate communities of color. Instead of advancing legislation that will undermine the health of our country’s most vulnerable populations, the Trump administration should work across the aisle to find ways to improve the Affordable Care Act.

Michele Jawando is the vice president for Legal Progress at the Center for American Progress. Connor Maxwell is the research associate for Progress 2050 at the Center.

White Media Continues to Ignore How GOP Health Care Bill will Disproportionately Harm Blacks & Latinos

From [MediaMatters] The Republican Party’s plan to gut the Affordable Care Act (ACA) will disproportionately hurt people of color -- a fact television and print news outlets have almost completely ignored in their coverage of ongoing health care debates.

On May 4, President Donald Trump held a White House celebration with a predominantly white group of Republican members of Congress after the House of Representatives voted to fund tax cuts for high-income earners by cutting health care subsidies and loosening patient protections benefitting low- and middle-income Americans. On May 8, The New York Times reported that 13 white Republican men would draft the Senate’s version of a health care reform bill, which remained shrouded in secrecy until it was released on June 22. Almost as if taking their que from the GOP, broadcast and cable news outlets made little effort over the same time period to invite diverse guests to discuss the health care bill despite dedicating significant coverage to the issue.

In fact, according to new research from Media Matters, news outlets have almost completely ignored how GOP health care plans would disproportionately impact people of color. A Media Matters review of the major broadcast and cable news providers available via Nexis (ABC, CBS, NBC, PBS, CNN, Fox News, and MSNBC) found only three significant stories from May 4 through July 9 on the health care bill’s disproportionate impact on communities of color. All three stories appeared on MSNBC's weekend program Politics Nation. Media Matters conducted the same analysis of five major print newspapers via Nexis and Factiva (Los Angeles Times, The New York Times, USA Today, The Washington Post, and The Wall Street Journal) and found only four print articles -- three in the Times and one in the Post -- highlighting that the GOP plans to repeal and replace the ACA would harm these already disadvantaged communities.

Click to read more ...

Court approves MetLife’s $32.5 Million Racial Discrimination Class Action settlement with Black Employees

From [HERE] A U.S. District Court has approved the $32.5 million settlement of a racial discrimination case against MetLife filed by a class of African-American former MetLife financial services representatives.

Judge William Pauley III of the Southern District of New York approved the settlement last week, after finding that the agreement is “fair, reasonable, adequate, and well within the range of final approval.”

The former employees filed the case against the insurer in 2015. They accused the firm of maintaining “a racially biased corporate culture and stereotypical views about the skills, abilities, and potential of African Americans that affect personnel,” a court docket said.

Marcus Creighton, the chief plaintiff, said MetLife denied him advancement opportunities, even though he was a “successful, experienced FSR and well-qualified to join management,” the document added.

According to the docket, MetLife’s “discriminatory” management assessments, training, and selection practices “systematically and disproportionately” excluded African Americans from branch management and most management-feeder positions. It added that non-African Americans in similar situations – including those who never expressed interest in management – were selected for management opportunities, management training, management feeder positions, and were assigned to manage the firm’s offices.

Click to read more ...

[voting is a fraud] Crosscheck 2.0 is Underway as Georgia Mails Out Voter 'Purge Notices' in Fulton County

From [HERE] and [HERE]  The ACLU of Georgia is exploring potential violations of federal elections law after a registered voter in Atlanta received a “purge notice” in the mail, uncovering more than 48,000 residents who received a similar notice in her county alone. The letter tells them they could be declared inactive because they filed change of address forms but didn’t update their voter registration, is illegal.

The letter states that voters have 30 days to confirm their address on their registration record before being deemed inactive, meaning they could be removed in the future. ACLU of Georgia legal director Sean J. Young said the organization plans to sue if Fulton doesn’t correct the issue.

The mailers referenced by the ACLU in its Tuesday letter specifically involve voters who have moved within Fulton County.

The ACLU alleges that, under the National Voter Registration Act of 1993, it is unlawful to designate a voter as inactive—and ultimately remove them from the voter rolls—for moving within the same county.

The purge notices received by Stacey Hopkins and other Atlanta-area residents informed voters that if they do not respond within 30 days to confirm their voter registration details, they “will be moved to an inactive status.” After being inactive for two subsequent federal election cycles, the voter will then be removed from the voter rolls. An “inactive” status does not prevent a voter from casting a ballot. However, it is the first step to removing voters from the official voter rolls that counties maintain in partnership with the Georgia secretary of state.

While these sort of notices are often part of regular voter list maintenance the secretary of state is required to perform under federal law, what’s unusual is that voters who moved within the same county received these notices. When voters move within the same county, they fall under a separate set of federal laws than if they move to a new county, called a “registrar’s jurisdiction” in the code.

In a letter obtained by Rewire from Sean Young, legal director of ACLU of Georgia, to Secretary of State Brian Kemp and Fulton County Board of Registration and Elections Chairperson Mary Carole Cooney, Young lays out the concerns surrounding the “purge notices” mailed to his client and at least 48,000 other residents of Atlanta’s Fulton County. It’s unclear how many other counties participated in sending out these purge notices, and how many have been sent to voters who moved within the same county.

“Sending out confusing and intimidating purge notices in an irresponsible and unlawful manner has the effect, if not the purpose, of making it harder for Georgia voters of all political parties—particularly voters with less income or educational background—to exercise their fundamental right to vote,” the letter states.

When Stacey Hopkins, the Fulton County resident who helped identify the voter purge issue, called the Fulton County Board of Registration and Elections and later the secretary of state’s office to obtain information about her notice, neither could say why she had received a purge notice.

“Subjecting voters to such Kafkaesque, bureaucratic nonsense is a hallmark of Jim Crow voter suppression,” the letter states.

GOP lawmakers in Georgia have pushed and defended discriminatory voter ID laws that have been shown to suppress voter turnout in states across the country. More than 50,000 people in Georgia were flagged in 2008 purges, and more than 4,500 were flagged for questions of citizenship.

Trump’s Election Integrity Commission Intends to hold its next meeting [Silent Auction] behind closed doors

From [ACLU] Despite requesting a staggering amount of sensitive data from every registered voter in the country, Donald Trump’s Election Integrity Commission intends to hold its next meeting behind closed doors, where the same registered voters will not be able to participate. That’s illegal, so yesterday the ACLU sued the president’s election commission under a federal law designed to ensure public accountability of advisory committees.

Under the Federal Advisory Committee Act, the commission is required to make all meetings open to the public, with enough notice to allow for in-person attendance. The commission must also make all written records, documents, and meeting minutes available. Most importantly, the commission must adopt measures to ensure that its work is not inappropriately influenced by special interests or the president himself.

Thus far, we’ve witnessed a total disregard for these requirements.

The commission has already held an initial meeting without public notice, and it will not permit the public to attend its next meeting on July 19. Instead, it has offered an internet livestream, a paltry replacement for real public engagement. It’s a troubling lack of transparency, especially for a body seeking an enormous amount of access to sensitive information. Our suit comes at the heels of Kris Kobach’s overreaching request to all 50 states to email the commission sensitive data on every registered voter, including full names, the last four digits of Social Security numbers, party affiliation, and voting history.

Click to read more ...

The Drug Policy Alliance Calls For Decriminalization - an end to criminal penalties for drug use & possession

From [HERE] The Drug Policy Alliance, a leading advocacy group, released a report Tuesday calling for an end to criminal penalties for drug use and possession. Once considered a radical approach, the position in the DPA report has already won the endorsement of more than 30 organizations and key stakeholders. Groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Latino Justice PRLDEF, Students for Sensible Drug Policy, and various others have backed the report’s call for decriminalization, a policy that essentially removes the threat of arrest or criminal penalties in cases of simple possession.

Drug decriminalization is the elimination of criminal penalties for drug use and possession, as well as the elimination of criminal penalties for the possession of equipment used for the purpose of introducing drugs into the human body, such as syringes.

The criminalization of drug possession is a major driver of mass incarceration and mass criminalization in the United States. Each year, U.S. law enforcement makes more than 1.5 million drug arrests — more arrests than for all violent crimes combined. The overwhelming majority — more than 80 percent — are for possession only and involve no violent offense.

On any given night, there are at least 133,000 people behind bars in U.S. prisons and jails for drug possession — and 63,000 of them are held pre-trial. Hundreds of thousands of people also remain under some form of correctional supervision (probation, parole, or other post-prison supervision) for drug possession. People convicted of drug possession face a host of additional consequences, including the loss of federal financial aid, eviction from public housing, disqualification from a wide range of occupational licenses, loss of the right to vote, and denial of public assistance. [MORE]

The widespread support for decriminalization comes at a crucial time, as Attorney General Jeff Sessions call for ramping up the war on drugs in the face of the nation’s growing opioid epidemic.

But despite the Trump administration’s shift toward more punative policies, Jag Davies, DPA’s communications director, said most Americans don’t realize how close to decriminalization many state policies already are.

“The US is closer to decriminalizing drugs than most people think, even in a red state like South Carolina,” he said on a conference call with reporters, noting that, in terms of public opinion, polls of presidential primary voters last year found that most support ending arrests for drug consumption and possession.

States included in the study were Maine (with 64% percent in favor of ending arrests), New Hampshire (66%), and South Carolina (59%).

Click to read more ...

D.C. Councilmember Wants to Make Homelessness a Protected Class

Above photo from new art exhibit from Vince Brown on homelessness in DC - City Under Siege until August 5, 2017 at the Anacostia Arts Center VIVID Solutions Gallery.

From [HERE] Although overall homelessness in the District fell more than 10 percent from 2016 to 2017, it's no secret that homeless people still face significant barriers to employment, housing, education, and other spheres. That's why At-Large Councilmember David Grosso proposed a new bill today that would make being homeless a protected class under the D.C. Human Rights Act, which broadly prohibits discrimination based on race, gender, sexuality, and income source.

The legislation would simply add homelessness to the law's list of almost 20 protected traits and allow the homeless to bring legal complaints with the District, possibly resulting in civil penalties, compensatory damages, or reinstatement of jobs. Typically, homelessness is defined in D.C. as not having a "fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence," including those sleeping on the streets, in cars, and in shelters. The council is also considering sweeping changes to its primary homeless services law, which officials say would bring D.C.'s definition of homelessness in line with federal guidelines.

Click to read more ...

Over 1000 Black & Latino SEIU Airport Workers Plan to Strike at United & American Airlines' Largest Hubs

From SEIU Over a thousand baggage handlers, cabin cleaners, wheelchair attendants, and skycaps are ready to strike at Philadelphia International Airport, Newark Liberty International Airport, LaGuardia International Airport, JFK International Airport, and Denver International Airport and could walk off their jobs any day this week. These contracted airport workers are protesting their employers' refusal to bargain a fair contract and unfair labor practices, including threats, intimidation and retaliation when they tried to join together to win higher pay by exercising their freedom to form a union. 

"Despite winning our union by a landslide, the airline contractors are refusing to bargain with us," says Rachel Sirleaf, a cabin cleaner with American Airlines contractor Prospect Air Services at Philadelphia International Airport. "The contractors should respect our right to a union so we are better able to provide for our families." 

Last year, Philadelphia airport workers made international headlines after staging a massive protest and work stoppage ahead of the DNC taking place in Philadelphia. The turbulence at the airport prompted Philadelphia Mayor Kenney and Pennsylvania Governor Wolf to step in and call on American Airlines to demand better practices from its contractors. 

Despite anti-union bullying and intimidation from PrimeFlight and Prospect, Philadelphia airport workers prevailed this spring when they voted overwhelmingly to join their union, 32BJ SEIU. Yet months later, American Airlines' contractors, PrimeFlight and Prospect—emboldened by President Trump—are erecting yet another hurdle for the airport workers by refusing to bargain a contract. Their refusal to bargain a contract has been encouraged by American Airlines, whose CEO, Doug Parker recently stated that they are waiting for the labor board to change under President Trump so that the contracted airport workers will be stripped of their union rights.  

"The American people need good jobs, and that means having the opportunity to join together in a union. There are thousands of jobs right here at our nation's airports that can and should be good union jobs that allow working people to raise their families and save for the future--like they used to be," says Mary Kay Henry, President of SEIU. "It's time major airlines support good pay and the opportunity to form a union instead of fighting working people every step of the way."

Click to read more ...

Gallup Poll: Only White People Have Confidence in Police & Their Overall Confidence has Risen Over 2 years

From [Gallup] [Among white people] overall confidence in the police has risen slightly in the past two years, with 57% of Americans now saying they have "a great deal" or "quite a lot" of confidence in law enforcement -- matching the overall average for the 25-year Gallup trend. Specifically the poll reveals that only 30% of Black's have confidence in police and 45% of Latinos have such confidence. The number for Latinos has dropped from 59% in 2014 to 45%. Overall 58% of white people have confidence in their police. Among liberal whites only 39% have confidence while 67% of conservative whites have confidence in police.  

The overall percentage of Americans who said they were confident in the police changed little from 2012-2014 (55%) to 2015-2017 (54%). But major differences have emerged among various subgroups over the past three years.

The 2015-2017 polling shows a widespread loss of confidence among groups that generally are in line politically with blacks -- Democrats and independents who lean Democratic, Hispanics, liberals and those younger than age 35. Confidence among Republicans and Republican leaners, whites, conservatives and those aged 55 or older has been stable or has increased slightly. As a result, gaps between groups are now evident by age, ethnicity and ideology, along with a larger gap by party affiliation.

Click to read more ...

[your rights are just words on paper] Fed Appeals Ct Says You Have a Constitutional Right to Film Police

From [HERE] On Friday, a panel of judges for the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously ruled that the First Amendment protects individuals’ right to film police officers performing their official duties. The 3rd Circuit now joins the 1st, 5th, 7th, 9th, and 11th Circuits in concluding that the Constitution guarantees a right to record. No federal appeals court has yet concluded that the First Amendment does not safeguard the right to film law enforcement officers conducting police activity in public.

Friday’s decision involved two instances in which the Philadelphia police retaliated against citizens attempting to film them. In the first incident, a legal observer named Amanda Geraci tried to film police arresting an anti-fracking protester when an officer pinned her against a pillar, preventing her from recording the arrest. In the second, a Temple University sophomore named Richard Fields tried to film police officers breaking up a house party when an officer asked him whether he “like[d] taking pictures of grown men” and demanded that he leave. When Fields refused, the officer arrested and detained him, confiscating his phone and looking through its photos and videos. The officer cited Fields for “Obstructing Highway and Other Public Passages,” although the charges were dropped when the officer failed to appear at a court hearing. Geraci and Fields filed civil rights suits against the officers who interfered with their filming attempts.

Writing for the court, Judge Thomas Ambro agreed that both Geraci and Fields held a constitutional right to record the police—a right that officers violated in both instances. “The First Amendment protects the public’s right of access to information about their officials’ public activities,” Ambro wrote. This access “is particularly important because it leads to citizen discourse” on public and political issues, the most highly valued First Amendment activity. Thus, the government is constitutionally barred from “limiting the stock of information from which members of the public may draw.” [MORE]

Coin-Operated GOP Puppeticans in Ohio sold their souls to the payday loan industry: Loans to the poor at (APR) 591%

Payday loans in Ohio are the country’s most expensive, with a typical annual percentage rate (APR) of 591 percent.2 Lenders charge higher prices in Ohio than in any neighboring state. [MORE]

From [Brett Larkin] Faith leaders are praying Ohio's elected officials abandon their deal with the devil and rein in payday lending predators.

"Lord, we cannot imagine a Heaven where your will includes poverty profiteering," Troy Jackson, leader of a Cincinnati anti-poverty program, solemnly told a June 14 gathering in the Statehouse atrium.

But prayers won't work in a state with the nation's highest payday loan rates and the largest number of morally bankrupt lawmakers.

The Lord's agenda means nothing to this crowd.

Unless it's accompanied by a check.

Soon, the rats who run the Statehouse will flee for home. Once again, a legislative session will end with legislators ignoring the will of an electorate, which in 2008 demanded Ohio stop punishing mothers with two jobs who need to borrow a few bucks to feed their children.

What type of a cruel, heartless government would tolerate gouging its working-class citizens with the most obscene short-term interest rates and fees in the United States.

This one. The state once called the "Heart of it All" is now the most heartless of them all.

 In 2008, by an astonishing margin of 1.45 million votes, Ohioans capped annual percentage rates for payday loans at 28 percent. But payday lenders escaped, slithering through a loophole that allowed them to ignore the voters and continue business as usual.

For nine years, legislators have failed to close that loophole. For nine years, the Ohio General Assembly has made it abundantly clear that how their constituents view payday lending matters not at all.

For nine years, Republican legislators have sided with an industry that puts money into their campaign bank accounts and removes it from the pockets of Ohio's working poor.

Click to read more ...

ICE Race Soldiers Told to Arrest All Undocumented Brown & Black Immigrants Regardless of Criminal Past or Threat to Public

From [HERE] The head of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement unit in charge of deportations has directed his officers to take action against all undocumented immigrants they may cross paths with, regardless of criminal histories. The guidance appears to go beyond the Trump administration’s publicly stated aims, and some advocates say may explain a marked increase in immigration arrests.

In a February memo, Matthew Albence, a career official who heads the Enforcement and Removal Operations division of ICE, informed his 5,700 deportation officers that, “effective immediately, ERO officers will take enforcement action against all removable aliens encountered in the course of their duties.”

The Trump administration, including Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly, has been clear in promising to ramp up immigration enforcement, but has so far emphasized that its priority was deporting immigrants who posed a public safety threat. Indeed, Kelly, to whom Albence ultimately reports, had seemed to suggest a degree of discretion when he told the agencies under his command earlier this year that immigration officers “may” initiate enforcement actions against any undocumented person they encountered. That guidance was issued just a day before Albence sent the memo to his staff.

A spokesman with ICE said Albence’s directive did not represent a break with Kelly’s stated aims, and was consistent with current agency policies.

“The memo directly supports the directions handed down in the executive orders and mirrors the language ICE consistently uses to describe its enforcement posture,” the spokeswoman, Sarah Rodriguez, said in a statement. “As Secretary Kelly and Acting Director [of ICE] Homan have stated repeatedly, ICE prioritizes the arrest and removal of national security and public safety threats; however, no class or category of alien in the United States is exempt from arrest or removal.”

However, Sarah Saldaña, who retired in January as head of ICE for the Obama administration, said the wording in the memo would have real consequences for undocumented immigrants.

“When you use the word ‘will’ instead of ‘may’ you are taking it a step further,” said Saldaña. “This is an important directive and people at ERO are bound by this directive unless someone above Matt Albence comes back and says, ‘You went too far.’ I don’t think you are going to find that person in this administration.”

Click to read more ...