Federal judge says immigration officers in Colorado can only arrest those at risk of fleeing
DENVER (AP) — Immigration officers in Colorado can detain people without a warrant only if they think they are likely to flee, a federal judge ruled Tuesday.
Senior U.S. District Judge R. Brooke Jackson issued the decision over a legal challenge from the American Civil Liberties Union of Colorado and other attorneys.
They represent four people, including asylum seekers, who were detained without warrant by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement this year as part of President Donald Trump’s increased immigration enforcement. The lawsuit accuses immigration officers of indiscriminately detaining Latinos to achieve enforcement goals without considering what is necessary to detain them legally.
Jackson said each of those suing had long-standing ties to their communities and that no reasonable officer could conclude they were likely to flee before obtaining a warrant to arrest them.
Before arresting anyone without a warrant, immigration officers must have good reason to believe someone is in the country illegally and is likely to flee before a warrant is obtained under federal law, he said. Jackson also said immigration officers must document why they arrested someone.
Department of Homeland Security spokeswoman Tricia McLaughlin called it an “activist decision” and said the department followed the law.
“Allegations that DHS law enforcement engages in ‘racial profiling’ are disgusting, reckless, and categorically FALSE,” he said in a statement.
The ruling is similar to one issued earlier this year in a case filed by another chapter of the ACLU of California. Arrests by Border Patrol agents. The government appealed this decision.
Another judge had also issued a restraining order banning federal agents from stopping people only after finding that they stopped people indiscriminately based on their race, language, job or location in the Los Angeles area. Supreme Court he lifted the order In September.
McLaughlin suggested the government would appeal the Colorado decision.
“The Supreme Court has recently vindicated us elsewhere on this issue, and we look forward to further vindication in this case as well,” he said.
