Welcome home, fellow Gator.

The Gator Nation's oldest and most active insider community
Join today!

Mandated Local Leo Cooperation turns into arrest, detain, deport

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by G8trGr8t, Mar 18, 2025.

  1. G8trGr8t

    G8trGr8t Premium Member

    35,835
    12,618
    3,693
    Aug 26, 2008
    and how does the law define reasonable ground?

    we are circular here. do you think the constitution reserves that kind of authority for a single individual?

    start with a clean slate. king for a day

    do you want to empower a single individual to use their discretion to be able to detain and deport any non citizen he feels compelled to target?
     
  2. OklahomaGator

    OklahomaGator Jedi Administrator Moderator VIP Member

    125,972
    164,785
    116,973
    Apr 3, 2007
    Congress passed the law, if you read through it, it also gives the Secretary of HHS the same power if a NRA presents a health risk to the country. Do you have an issue with that?

    I'm fine with the law the way it is written.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. GatorBen

    GatorBen Premium Member

    6,636
    1,128
    2,968
    Apr 9, 2007
    The constitution reserves the power to decide matters of immigration to Congress, the judicial gloss is that is a plenary power of Congress (i.e. it’s a near absolute power), and courts have described Congress’s immigration powers as perhaps the most complete power they possess. There are judicial opinions noting that, if Congress wanted to deport literally every single non-citizen in the United States, they have the power to pass a law doing so.

    Given that, what suggests that they don’t have the power to say deport any alien the Secretary of State makes this certification about?
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  4. wgbgator

    wgbgator Premium Member

    31,804
    2,081
    2,218
    Apr 19, 2007
    I'm no lawyer, but it seems like if there is an imposed standard of "reasonable ground" that opens up any exercise of that power to judicial review.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  5. saltydoggator

    saltydoggator Freshman

    16
    2
    1,768
    Oct 22, 2008
    What is the substantive reason a County Sheriff should not hold someone a day or two longer at the County Jail if they know he has an outstanding Federal warrant? Regardless if its a Federal warrant for fraudulently receiving government benefits, unlawful entry into the United States or any other charge - what is the substantive justification for the County Sheriff to not extend basic courtesy to fellow law enforcement?
     
  6. G8trGr8t

    G8trGr8t Premium Member

    35,835
    12,618
    3,693
    Aug 26, 2008
    This isn't federal warrants. It's resident/citizen status is my understanding. Are you legal? Prove it or go to jail. Any interaction. Report a rape, prove your citizenship. Run a stop sign, prove your citizenship
     
  7. saltydoggator

    saltydoggator Freshman

    16
    2
    1,768
    Oct 22, 2008
    Below is from the ICE website on Program 287(g). Looks like it covers local law enforcement participation on warrants, incarcerated persons and routine policing. I'm critical of modern policing, but it's ridiculous to assert that ICE trains local law enforcement to respond to a rape call by asking for papers.

    ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations operates three 287(g) models:
    • The Jail Enforcement Model is designed to identify and process removable aliens — with criminal or pending criminal charges — who are arrested by state or local law enforcement agencies.
    • The Task Force Model serves as a force multiplier for law enforcement agencies to enforce limited immigration authority with ICE oversight during their routine police duties.
    • The Warrant Service Officer program allows ICE to train, certify and authorize state and local law enforcement officers to serve and execute administrative warrants on aliens in their agency’s jail.
     
  8. G8trGr8t

    G8trGr8t Premium Member

    35,835
    12,618
    3,693
    Aug 26, 2008
    for all those who talked about how the local training was just a cooperation thingy and wouldn't ahve local leo playing ICE agent.

    here's your sign.

    pulled over by GPD, expired license, shipped to Miami ICE center. For an expired driver license...they must be getting bonus points for these detentions

    University of Florida Student Sent to ICE Detention Facility Over Expired Driver’s License

    A student at the University of Florida is being held at a detention facility in Miami after he was pulled over and found to be driving with an expired license and registration tag. Twenty-seven-year-old international student Felipe Zapata Velásquez, who is in the country on a student visa, was arrested by the Gainesville Police Department on March 28 over the infractions.

    Zapata Velásquez, a Colombian national, was reportedly sent to the Krome Detention Center in Miami and has not been heard from since he was taken there on April 1. As noted by the Miami New Times, he does not appear in the Immigration and Customs Enforcement detainee database. The New Times reported:
    ................................
    Under current regulations, the U.S. Department of State can revoke non-immigrant visas, including F-1 visas, for people arrested for driving under the influence or similar offenses.

    According to NTN24, ICE gave Zapata Velásquez two options post-arrest: go to jail while his case is resolved in immigration court or sign his own deportation order.
     
  9. G8trGr8t

    G8trGr8t Premium Member

    35,835
    12,618
    3,693
    Aug 26, 2008
    this action by GPD seems to totally contradict your understanding and support my position that local leo can and will use whatever reason to put p[eople into the black hole that ICE has become and that was the goal all along...thoughts about this guy being arrested and shipped to Krome avenue for a expired DL??
     
  10. G8trGr8t

    G8trGr8t Premium Member

    35,835
    12,618
    3,693
    Aug 26, 2008
    is an expired DL a potentially serious threat to the USA?
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  11. G8trGr8t

    G8trGr8t Premium Member

    35,835
    12,618
    3,693
    Aug 26, 2008
    and the supreme court answer to gatorben


    TRUMP v. J. G. G. | Supreme Court | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute
    The detainees also sought equitable relief against summary removal. Although judicial review under the AEA is limited, we have held that an individual subject to detention and removal under that statute is entitled to “ ‘judicial review’ ” as to “questions of interpretation and constitutionality” of the Act as well as whether he or she “is in fact an alien enemy fourteen years of age or older.” Ludecke, 335 U. S., at 163−164, 172, n. 17. (Under the Proclamation, the term “alien enemy” is defined to include “all Venezuelan citizens 14 years of age or older who are members of TdA, are within the United States, and are not actually naturalized or lawful permanent residents of the United States.” 90 Fed. Reg. 13034.) The detainees’ rights against summary removal, however, are not currently in dispute. The Government expressly agrees that “TdA members subject to removal under the Alien Enemies Act get judicial review.” Reply in Support of Application To Vacate 1. “It is well established that the Fifth Amendment entitles aliens to due process of law” in the context of removal proceedings. Reno v. Flores, 507 U. S. 292, 306 (1993). So, the detainees are entitled to notice and opportunity to be heard “appropriate to the nature of the case.” Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co., 339 U. S. 306, 313 (1950). More specifically, in this context, AEA detainees must receive notice after the date of this order that they are subject to removal under the Act. The notice must be afforded within a reasonable time and in such a manner as will allow them to actually seek habeas relief in the proper venue before such removal occurs.

     For all the rhetoric of the dissents, today’s order and per curiam confirm that the detainees subject to removal orders under the AEA are entitled to notice and an opportunity to challenge their removal. The only question is which court will resolve that challenge. For the reasons set forth, we hold that venue lies in the district of confinement. The dissents would have the Court delay resolving that issue, requiring—given our decision today—that the process begin anew down the road. We see no benefit in such wasteful delay.
     
  12. G8trGr8t

    G8trGr8t Premium Member

    35,835
    12,618
    3,693
    Aug 26, 2008
    local leo now using same ICE powers that are overriding (or attempting to) due process

    see UF student sitting in Krome avenue for exhibit A
     
  13. G8trGr8t

    G8trGr8t Premium Member

    35,835
    12,618
    3,693
    Aug 26, 2008
    you quote what an article says, here is more of what is happening on the ground..every person of foreign appearance now needs to carry a copy of their birth certificate with them and that may not even be enough..thoughts?

    did you see the story above about an immigrant with an expired DL. that makes him a criminal subject to visa revocation and immediate deportation to a foreign prison... to answer your question again, this time, with real time events, no this isn't simply training...

    @WESGATORS gators..thoughts on the reality vs the theoretical

    U.S.-born man held for ICE under Florida’s new anti-immigration law • Minnesota Reformer
     
  14. GatorBen

    GatorBen Premium Member

    6,636
    1,128
    2,968
    Apr 9, 2007
    Immigration is really complicated, but that’s under a different law and not really relevant to the question he responded to.

    Under the provision we had been discussing, what makes the alien removable is the Secretary of State’s certification that their presence harms the foreign policy interests of the United States.

    As I acknowledged, they can get an immigration court appearance. And presumably they can file a habeas petition as well. But the only real legally relevant consideration for either of those two courts is “did the Secretary of State make the required certification.” Nothing about what you posted suggests that any court can or should second guess the Secretary of State’s reasoning.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Disagree Bacon! Disagree Bacon! x 1
  15. citygator

    citygator GC Hall of Fame

    13,847
    2,856
    3,303
    Apr 3, 2007
    Charlotte
    IMG_0427.jpeg
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  16. saltydoggator

    saltydoggator Freshman

    16
    2
    1,768
    Oct 22, 2008
    Uh, this Zapata guy was in the US illegally:
    Zapata-Velásquez entered the U.S. on an F-1 student visa on Feb. 12, 2023, to attend Santa Fe College, a small public college in Gainesville, according to ICE. But on October 3, 2024, after failing to enroll, his student status was terminated on SEVIS, the portal that tracks students’ immigration compliance.

    But the best part is the guy was on a suspended license and using stolen plates:

    Zapata-Velásquez was arrested in Gainesville on March 28 for driving with a suspended license and for driving a car with a license plate not assigned to that vehicle, according to court records.

    Read the article. This 27 year old entered the US on a student Visa, never enrolled at Santa Fe (he was not a UF student as inaccurately reported) and was cruising around Gainesville in an RV with no registration, on a suspended driver's license and using stolen plates. Once they picked this guy up he self-deported for obvious reasons. Make the argument that GPD did not improve the Gainesville community and the United States as a whole by their efforts playing a role in the deportation of this 27 year old "student."

    Read more at: https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/education/article303879906.html#storylink=cpy
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  17. BLING

    BLING GC Hall of Fame

    9,699
    1,017
    2,843
    Apr 16, 2007
    I think it’s very clear this guy should ultimately be deported, that’s pretty automatic when they are on a “student visa” and don’t enroll in school. A lot of weird in that story, a 27 year old on a “student visa” looking to enroll at Santa Fe (a… community college???). That’s already questionable, although if he’d just enrolled in school then whatever. But he didn’t. I think the stolen plate thing pushed it over to top to where not just the deportation order is appropriate, I’d say detention is fully justified. Not a controversial one imo. This guy didn’t follow his visa requirement AND was a criminal. Deportation 101. Very different from the ones where they are holding real students (in a few cases for the “crime” of writing an op-ed).
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  18. saltydoggator

    saltydoggator Freshman

    16
    2
    1,768
    Oct 22, 2008
    I missed the case where ICE is holding a student solely for writing an op-ed. If you have a link I would like to take a look.
     
  19. VAg8r1

    VAg8r1 GC Hall of Fame

    23,525
    1,999
    1,763
    Apr 8, 2007
    Federal judge orders Tufts student detained by ICE to be brought to Vermont
    Ozturk was one of four students who wrote an op-ed in the campus newspaper, The Tufts Daily, last year criticizing the university's response to student activists demanding that Tufts "acknowledge the Palestinian genocide," disclose its investments and divest from companies with ties to Israel. Tufts University President Sunil Kumar said the opinion piece was not in violation of any Tufts policies and no complaints were made about it.

    Although the official pretext was that she was undermining US foreign policy the real reason that she is being held and may be deported was the op-ed.
     
  20. saltydoggator

    saltydoggator Freshman

    16
    2
    1,768
    Oct 22, 2008
    The article says the op-ed was published last year. If that is all they have on her its weird they would wait so long to detain her don't you think? But the article also references this Mahmoud guy that has also been detained. According to the article Marco Rubio said Khalil's presence in the country undermines "U.S. policy to combat anti-Semitism around the world and in the United States, in addition to efforts to protect Jewish students from harassment and violence in the United States." Maybe the government is applying the same standard to her?

    Judge allows government to continue effort to deport Mahmoud Khalil