Washington, D.C. — A major decision looms for the vast majority of the 81 jurisdictions around the United States that have agreed to partner with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to enforce federal immigration laws, under an agreement known as 287(g). The agreements essentially deputize local law enforcement to act as ICE agents, greatly expanding the government’s capacity to identify, detain, and deport immigrants. Without further action, nearly all current 287(g) agreements with ICE will expire on June 30, 2019.
As localities around the country decide whether to renew or terminate their 287(g) agreements, a new Center for American Progress analysis looks at some of the harmful impacts that 287(g) agreements have on people and communities. The analysis highlights that:
- During the first 16 months of the Trump administration, 287(g) agreements led to more than 12,000 deportations. This is more than two and a half times the number of 287(g)-related deportations that took place during the last 16 months of the Obama administration.
- Maintaining 287(g) programs would hurt local economies. Immigrant households in 287(g) jurisdictions contribute more than $24.4 billion in annual tax revenue and generate $65.9 billion in spending power.
- Public safety suffers. A previous survey of undocumented Mexicans in San Diego County found that respondents would be 60.8 percent less likely to report witnessing a crime and 42.9 percent less likely to report being a victim of a crime if they knew that local law enforcement was cooperating with ICE.
“The negative impact of 287(g) agreements extends far beyond the immigrants they are meant to target and are only exacerbated by the fact that 287(g) led to more than 12,000 deportations in the first 16 months of the Trump administration,” said Claudia Flores, immigration campaign manager at the Center for American Progress. “Communities have a choice. Do they want to be an accomplice to Trump’s inhumane immigration policy, while harming public safety, hurting their economies, and separating families? Or do they want to do the right thing by withdrawing from the 287(g) program?”
Click here to read: “A Controversial ICE Program and the Decision Facing Localities This June” by Claudia Flores
For more information or to speak to an expert, contact Julia Cusick at [email protected] or 202-495-3682.