Mediaboss Marketing

YAKIMA, Wash. A local case questioning whether Yakima County jail authorities are violating due process by enforcing federal immigration holds could affect jails nationwide, a Yakima attorney said Wednesday.

U.S. District Judge Salvador Mendoza granted a temporary restraining order Tuesday requiring the county jail to remove an immigration hold placed on an inmate so he could be released on bail pending trial for a local assault charge.

Mendozas order resulted from a lawsuit filed by the inmates attorney arguing that the hold placed on local inmates by federal Immigration and Custom Enforcement officers was enforced by the county jail without judicial review, a violation of civil rights under the Fourth Amendment. ICE officers typically fill out a document, called an administrative warrant, naming an inmate suspected of violating immigration laws and give it to jail officials who in turn place the local inmate on a federal hold.

The issue here is (ICE) is giving the form to Yakima County and Yakima County is doing something that is not under its authority, said Bernardo Rafael Cruz, an attorney with Columbia Legal Services in Yakima. Cruz is representing the inmate. This could have wider affects, and it could have wider policy implications across the country.

Calls to ICE spokeswoman Rose Riley in Seattle seeking comment were not immediately returned Thursday.

The temporary restraining order against the county is part of an ongoing lawsuit filed by Columbia Legal Services and the Immigrants Rights Project on behalf of Antonio Sanchez-Ochoa. The suit seeks to stop the county jail from complying with immigration holds without judicial review and award Sanchez-Ochoa damages to be determined at trial.

Although a local judge granted Sanchez-Ochoa a $50,000 bail option on the local charge, a bail bondsman wouldnt work with him because of an immigration hold placed on him at the jail, Cruz said.

Sanchez-Ochoa has been incarcerated since May 4.

Yakima County Prosecuting Attorney Joe Brusic said he and other prosecuting attorneys from across the state in an April meeting with U.S. district attorneys requested that ICE officers get warrants signed by a federal judge when seeking to place holds on local inmates. The prosecuting attorneys were told it wasnt necessary, Brusic said.

Thats what we would truly like, but ICE, theyre not going to do that anytime soon, he said.

This is starting to create a national ripple in the type of paperwork needed to present to local authorities for holds, Brusic added.

However, U.S. District attorneys also said they wouldnt protect counties honoring the administrative warrants from liability stemming from a potential lawsuit.

Theyre not going to help us out, at least thats what they said in April, and thats not right, he said. We were summarily frustrated with that response.

Even so, the county continued to work with ICE due to a good working relationship with the federal agency in the past and because the jail has federal contracts which generate income for the jail to house prisoners with immigration holds, Brusic said.

Its complicated on many levels.

Under the federal contract, the jail receives about $84 per inmate held for ICE.

On average, ICE brings about 120 federal inmates suspected of violating immigration laws to the jail each month. In addition, ICE officers review the jails bookings daily and place holds on other inmates who have been jailed locally for a variety of offenses. As many as 15 of those local inmates can be held each month at ICE officers requests.

Inmates already in federal custody when brought to the jail are not included in the lawsuit because federal law gives ICE officers authority to arrest and detain someone suspected of being in violation of immigration laws, said attorney Matt Adams with the Northwest Immigrant Rights Project in Seattle.

Typically, prosecution of local inmates at the jail must be completed before ICE takes custody of them, jail officials have said.

But placing a federal hold on those inmates while they are in local custody boils down to local authorities doing the work of federal authorities, Adams said.

What our case is about is clarifying that the Fourth Amendment prevents Yakima County from arresting people at the request of federal immigration authorities, he said.

Read more:
Local immigration case could have national impact - Yakima Herald-Republic