N.S. council to consider adopting ACLU-drafted immigration protection ordinance

11
2124

NORTH SMITHFIELD – Members of the Town Council will consider enacting an ordinance next week crafted by the American Civil Liberties Union Rhode Island that would put limitations on the North Smithfield Police Department’s involvement with agents from United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement, with requirement of a judicial warrant for detainers or to obtain private information.

Council President Kimberly Alves and Vice President Rebecca DeCristofaro are sponsors of an agenda item for discussion, vote or other action on “the Municipal Immigrant Protection Ordinance for Rhode Island Cities and Towns,” at the meeting scheduled for Monday, Feb. 3.

The proposed 11-page law was sent to councilors along with a letter from ACLU RI Executive Director Steven Brown on Friday, Jan. 24.

“In order to preserve the constitutional rights of all Rhode Islanders, our model ordinance includes such provisions as requiring judicial warrants before honoring ICE detainers; assisting victims of crime who may be eligible for special immigration status; rejecting participation in a program known as 287(g) that essentially deputizes local police to act as immigration; and avoiding other forms of engagement in federal immigration enforcement that can adversely affect public safety and undermine good police-community relations,” notes Brown. “Importantly, this model ordinance in no way bars your police officers from continuing to cooperate with ICE in enforcing immigration law when backed by judicial authority or otherwise properly mandated by federal law.”

Brown states that the new municipal law as drafted is important for maintaining community-police relations, noting the importance of ensuring that witnesses and victims are not afraid of encounters with police – including U.S. citizens worried that officers might mistake them for illegal immigrants. He notes that the ACLU RI filed a successful lawsuit on behalf of a Providence resident and U.S. citizen who was unlawfully detained at the ACI due to such an error.

“Given the Trump administration’s pledge to expand ICE personnel for more immigration enforcement, these types of mistakes are sure to increase,” Brown notes. “We are prepared to take action to assist your immigration-supportive policies and practices as needed.”

According to the proposed law, local police shall not stop, question, interrogate, investigate or arrest an individual based on immigration status – either actual or suspected. Officers would also not inquire about the immigration status of crime victims, witnesses or anyone who goes to police for assistance unless it is necessary to investigate criminal activity.

“The purpose of this ordinance is to foster respect and trust between law enforcement and residents, to protect limited resources, to encourage cooperation between residents and town officials, especially law enforcement, and to ensure community security and due process for all,” the proposed text states.

The North Smithfield Police Department would also be banned from entering agreements to enforce federal immigration law, and would only honor detainer requests that have a judicial warrant or if there’s probable cause to believe the individual was involved in terrorist activity with extenuating circumstances preventing a warrant. The ordinance would similarly limit police from providing private information on individuals without a federal warrant, and ICE requests to question individuals in custody and utilize police headquarters for interrogations would also require the judicial order.

“Public safety in (North Smithfield) is best promoted when victims and witnesses of crime feel safe cooperating with law enforcement officials,” states the proposed law.

Additional language would require the NSPD to provide individuals with a copy of any ICE request to interview or detain them, and would ban the agency from providing assistance in creating a registry based on race, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, religion, ethnicity or national origin. Further provisions note that victims of crime can a request a visa if they are likely to be helpful in the investigation or prosecution of a crime.

The ordinance would also require the school district to adopt a policy establishing procedures for handling interactions with immigration officials seeking information about or looking to speak with students.

Police would present semi-annual reports to the town council with information on ICE requests.

The meeting will be held at Town Hall at 83 Green St. starting at 6:45 p.m. The agenda can be found here and documents related to the agenda will be posted on the town website Monday at 10 a.m.

Oh hi there 👋
It’s nice to meet you.

Sign up to receive awesome content in your inbox, every week.

We don’t spam!

11 COMMENTS

  1. Violating the sovereignty of citizens and naturalized citizens that followed the rules,
    Customs and laws through proper channels
    for the past 150 years.

    Violating the oath to the Constitution by
    elected officials to satisfy local political
    culture is misguided and reckless. Unfortunately half of your constituents are being either ignored or told to go”fish”.

    Clearly some cannot read the room and embrace being on the wrong side of history,
    all the while becoming “famous “ in the process.

    Hopefully logical, law abiding leadership prevail.

  2. Copied from the NS Town Charter:

    “ARTICLE XI. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SAFETY
    Sec. 1. Office.
    There is hereby created the office of the director of public safety whose duties shall be
    performed by the town administrator, or a person appointed by him.
    Sec. 2. Police department.
    (1) Organization: Within the office of public safety there shall be a police department the head of which shall be the chief of police who shall be a police officer with at least three years’ experience above the rank of patrolman in any organized police department or any other law enforcement agency providing equivalent experience with preference given to a qualified elector of the town. He shall be appointed by the town administrator for an indefinite term and shall be subject to removal by the town administrator, in accordance with provisions of this charter.”

    Before the NS Town Council votes or takes action to potentially ban the NSPD from doing anything, we absolutely need to hear from the Chief of Police and the Director of Public Safety. Where do they stand on this? Do they support restricting police in their sworn duty to protect and serve? Because there are restrictions in the ordinance, and we need to hear from those charged with leading our safety efforts.

    Any action taken on this matter by the TC without the review, opinion and support of those charged with public safety is essentially contrary to the Charter, and largely irresponsible.

    • Doesn’t the TC create the rules that the police have to follow within town? Aka, it’s not up to the police? Do we really need more lawsuits for our town/police department when they violate human rights/due process? This protects the police of the town and residents.

      • Did anyone read the ACLU’s “MUNICIPAL IMMIGRANT PROTECTION ORDINANCE
        FOR RHODE ISLAND CITIES AND TOWNS”?
        The ordinance includes this:
        “12. Enforcement. An aggrieved individual or an organization that is chartered for the purpose of combating discrimination, promoting the rights of immigrants, or safeguarding civil rights shall be entitled to seek and obtain injunctive and declaratory relief, damages and attorneys’ fees for any violation of this ordinance.”

        The ACLU is essentially setting themselves up to sue the town, and two Town Council members want to help that cause. Did those two council members actually read the ordinance, and did they confer with our Town Solicitor before including the agenda item? Did they confer with anyone, or are they basically virtue signaling because they can, and potential harm to taxpayers be damned?

        This is actually kind of brilliant on the part of the ACLU, who wants NS elected officials to agree that if we as a Town adopt their ordinance, and NSPD doesn’t follow it to the letter – we approve of the ACLU filing suit and coming for NS taxpayer dollars – “for any violation”.

        We have elected officials who are willing to court lawsuits to what, prove moral superiority? What about fiduciary duty to taxpayers? If this ordinance passes, NSPD is clearly on the defensive, and taxpayers are clearly exposed to any litigation the ACLU determines can fund their enterprise.

    • The TC absolutely has the right, under the charter, to take action without the review of the chief or TA or director of public safety. It’s unclear what your excerpt has to do with passing an ordinance.

  3. Councilwomen Alves DeCristofaro cannot be serious with this? If so, another example of
    Progressive lunatics making it harder for law enforcement to do perform their duties. Last I checked, President Trump won the North Smithfield vote. More than 2/3rds of Americans agree with the issues and dangers of the invasion of our borders over the last 4 years.

    North Smithfield is not a sanctuary town, please don’t move towards making it easier for people who have not been granted immigration status to move to or hide within.

    I think you are really out of touch (like the RI ACLU) by putting this on the town council agenda for vote and passage. Last I checked someone only has constitutional rights once they are an AMERICAN CITIZEN of this great country. Please re-think this. Mr richer is absolutely correct in his statement.

    • Hey T/J/J, the constitution applies to non citizens as well, a quick search proves this. If anything, the agenda item will enforce the rights the constitution gives to the residents and law enforcement in this matter. There’s over 30 countries that fall under the umbrella term American, so….

      • Glad to see you’re bringing your word salads into 2025. Wondering where you have been.

        2 words like Joel said “Laken Riley”

        Anyone who supports this ACLU nonsense is supporting making NS a sanctuary town. Wonder if that is what our chief wants.

        • Hey t/j/j,
          I understand that you don’t like what I have to say, and just say word salad when you’re proven wrong. It’s okay, I enjoy proving you wrong. Better luck next time.

  4. I believe the number of illegal immigrants encouraged by the previous administration has caused more of a safety concern for us American citizens than the use of LE to help facilitate their removal.

    The ACLU has lost its way, in fact, I believe they have forgotten the “A” in ACLU stands for “American”.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here