ICE

Myth vs. Fact: DHS Zero-Tolerance Policy

Release Date:
June 18, 2018

In recent days, we have seen reporters, Members of Congress, and other groups mislead the public on the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) zero-tolerance policy.

Federal law enforcement officers have sworn duties to enforce the laws that Congress passes. Repeating intentionally untrue and unsubstantiated statements about DHS agents, officers, and procedures is irresponsible and deeply disrespectful to the men and women who risk their lives every day to secure our border and enforce our laws.

 


Myth

DHS has a policy to separate families at the border.


Fact

DHS does not have a blanket policy of separating families at the border. However, DHS does have a responsibility to protect all minors in our custody. This means DHS will separate adults and minors under certain circumstances. These circumstances include: 1) when DHS is unable to determine the familial relationship, 2) when DHS determines that a child may be at risk with the parent or legal guardian, or 3) when the parent or legal guardian is referred for criminal prosecution.

  • Familial Relationship – If there is reason to question the claimed familial relationship between an adult and child, it is not appropriate to detain adults and children together.
  • Human Trafficking and Smuggling – If there is reason to suspect the purported parent or legal guardian of human trafficking or smuggling, DHS detains the adult in an appropriate, secure detection facility, separate from the minor. DHS continues to see instances and intelligence reports indicating minors are trafficked by unrelated adults, posing as a “family” in an effort to avoid detention.
  • Safety Risk – If there is reason to suspect the purported parent or legal guardian poses a safety risk to the child (e.g. suspected child abuse), it is not appropriate to maintain the adult and child together.
  • Criminal Prosecution – If an adult is referred for criminal prosecution, the adult will be transferred to U.S. Marshals Service custody and any children will be classified as an unaccompanied alien child and transferred to the Department of Health and Human Services custody.

In recent months, DHS has seen a staggering increase in the number of illegal aliens using children to pose as family units to gain entry into the United States. From October 2017 to February 2018, there was a 315 percent increase in the number of cases of adults with minors fraudulently posing as “family units” to gain entry.

 


Myth

Prior to April 2017, DHS never separated families arriving at the border.


Fact

DHS has separated families under the circumstances described above. Because of court decisions, DHS can generally no longer hold families in detention beyond 20 days.

 


Myth

DHS can indefinitely detain families who cross the border illegally.


Fact

DHS generally releases families within 20 days. This creates a “get out of jail free” card for illegal alien families and encourages groups of illegal aliens to pose as families hoping to take advantage of that loophole.

In 2014, DHS increased detention facilities for arriving alien families and held families pending the outcome of immigration proceedings. However, a federal judge ruled in 2016 that under the Flores Settlement Agreement, minors detained as part of a family unit cannot be detained in unlicensed facilities for longer than a presumptively reasonable period of 20 days, at which point, such minors must be released or transferred to a licensed facility. Because most jurisdictions do not offer licensure for family residential centers, DHS rarely holds family units for longer than 20 days. The judge’s ruling made it much more difficult for the Federal government to use the detention authorities Congress gave it.

 


Myth

DHS is referring for prosecution all families coming to the border.


Fact

DHS only refers to the Department of Justice those adults who violate the law by crossing the border illegally (or who have violated some other criminal law) and are amenable for prosecution. When adults, with or without children, unlawfully enter this country, there must be a consequence for breaking our laws.

DHS is not referring for prosecutions families or individuals arriving at ports of entry or attempting to enter the country through legal means. These families and individuals have not broken the law and will be processed accordingly.

 


Myth

DHS is turning away asylum seekers at ports of entry.


Fact

DHS complies with Federal law with regard to processing individuals claiming asylum at ports of entry.

CBP processes all aliens arriving at all ports of entry without documents as expeditiously as possible without negatively affecting the agency's primary mission to protect the American public from dangerous people and materials while enhancing the nation’s economic competitiveness through facilitating legitimate trade and travel.

As the number of arriving aliens determined to be inadmissible at ports of entry continues to rise, CBP must prioritize its limited resources to ensure its primary mission is being executed. Depending on port circumstances at the time of arrival, CBP officials will allocate the necessary resources to its primary mission and operate appropriate access controls and queue management procedures for those arriving aliens without proper travel documents.

 


Myth

DHS separates families who entered at the ports of entry and who are seeking asylum – even though they have not broken the law.


Fact

If an adult enters at a port of entry and claims asylum, they will not face prosecution for illegal entry. DHS does have a responsibility to protect minors we apprehend and will separate in three circumstances:1) when DHS is unable to determine the familial relationship, 2) when DHS determines that a child may be at risk with the parent or legal guardian, or 3) when the parent or legal guardian is referred for criminal prosecution.

 


Myth

Once separated, arriving alien adults cannot contact minors and are not told where the minors are being held by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).


Fact

DHS is committed to and has procedures in place to connect family members after separation so adults know the location of minors and have regular communication with them.

HHS and DHS work to facilitate communication between detained adults and minors (in HHS custody) in a number of ways to include telephone and/or video conferencing. Additionally, ICE has posted information in all over 72-hour facilities advising detained adults who are trying to locate, and/or communicate with a child in the custody of HHS to call the Detention Reporting and Information Line (DRIL) for assistance. This posted information includes:

  • HHS Adult Hotline (24 hours a day, 7 days a week, in both English and Spanish):
    • If calling from outside an ICE detention facility, call 1-800-203-7001.
    • If calling from an ICE detention facility, dial 699# on the free call platform.
    • Please note that you will need to provide the child’s full name, date of birth, and country of origin. It is also helpful to provide the child’s alien registration number, if you know it.
  • HHS Email: information@ORRNCC.com

Individuals may also obtain information about a particular immigration case (including their child’s), or information about reunifying with minors, through the following methods:

  • ICE Call Center (Monday-Friday, 8 am-8 pm EST):
    • If calling from outside an ICE detention facility, call 1-888-351-4024.
    • If calling from an ICE detention facility, dial 9116# on the free call platform.
  • ICE Email: Parental.Interests@ice.dhs.gov

Additionally, CBP has developed and distributed bilingual documents outlining the separation and reunification process.

 


Myth

Language barriers prevent aliens apprehended at the border, and subject to prosecution, from receiving adequate information.


Fact

All US Border Patrol trainees are required to take Spanish language training while at the Border Patrol Academy, and achieve proficiency in Spanish. All Border Patrol personnel on the Southwest Border are bilingual.

CBP apprehends illegal aliens from numerous countries that speak many languages other than Spanish. Should an agent ever have a language or communication issue, they are required to find another Agent who speaks the language or to utilize contract interpreters.

All Border Patrol personnel at the border are directed to clearly explain the relevant process to apprehended individuals. CBP provides detainees with written documentation (in Spanish and English) that lays out the process – to include the appropriate phone numbers to contact.

 


Myth

CBP and ICE officers are not properly trained to separate minors from their custodians.


Fact

The safety of CBP employees, detainees, and the public is paramount during all aspects of CBP operations. CBP treats all individuals in its custody with dignity and respect, and complies will all laws and policy, including CBP’s National Standards on Transport, Escort, Detention, and Search (TEDS). TEDS reinforces/reiterates the need to consider the best interest of children and mandates adherence to established protocols to protect at-risk populations, to include standards for the transport and treatment of minors in CBP custody.

All ICE facility staff who interact with adults receive trauma-informed care training. ICE is augmenting mental health care staffing, to include trained clinical staff, to provide mental health services to detained adults.

 


Myth

DHS detention facilities are in poor condition and do not provide clean drinking water.


Fact

DHS facilities are safe and sanitary, and adults and minors are provided access to food and drinking water, medical care as needed, and adequate temperature control and ventilation.

 


Myth

DHS and HHS houses migrants in “inhumane fenced cages” or in an “ice box.”


Fact

DHS and HHS utilize short-term facilities in order to process and temporarily hold migrants that have been apprehended. These short-term facilities do not employ the use of ‘cages’ to house minors. Certain facilities make use of barriers in order to separate minors of different genders and age groups – for the safety of those who are being held. Additionally, CBP facilities have adequate temperature control and ventilation. ICE facilities are designed for longer-term detention of adults and, in some cases, families.

DHS takes seriously our responsibility for the safety and security of all migrants in the custody of the United States government.

 


Myth

DHS has never separated families for prosecutions before – this is a new policy in this Administration.


Fact

Illegal border crossers, including family units, were referred for prosecutions, as appropriates, under the previous Administration. The average referral rate for amenable adults from FY10 – FY16 was 21 percent.

 


Myth

By choice, DHS refuses to keep families together through the immigration adjudication and removal process.


Fact

Court decisions interpreting the Flores Settlement Agreement (FSA), which has been in existence for over 20 years but was significantly broadened in 2016, limits the government’s ability to detain family units. Pursuant to these court decisions, minors detained as part of a family unit cannot be detained in unlicensed facilities for longer than a presumptively reasonable period of 20 days, at which point, minors must be released or transferred to a licensed facility. Because most jurisdictions do not offer licensure for family residential centers, DHS can rarely detain a family for longer than 20 days.

The Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 (TVPRA) requires unaccompanied alien children (other than those from contiguous countries – Mexico and Canada – who are eligible to withdraw their application for admission) be transferred from DHS to the Department of Health and Human Services within 72 hours, absent exceptional circumstances. Read more about Myth vs. Fact: DHS Zero-Tolerance Policy

13 Facts the Media 'Pros' Don’t Want You to Know About 'Family Border Separation'

The fire hose of fake news from the establishment media this week on the issue of illegal immigrant families separated at the border is designed to mislead the American people — and to distract from Trump’s recent successes.

Here are the facts — 13 truths the media do not want you to know about President Trump’s legal, humane, and moral handling of adults and children who enter our country illegally.

 

1. Trump Is Only Enforcing the Law

... In truth, Trump is only complying with and enforcing the law, which is his constitutional duty and responsibility.

When the media claim Trump has a “choice,” what they mean is he has a choice to ignore the law as Obama did when he illegally released untold numbers of illegals into America....

2. Trump’s Only Choice Is to Separate Illegal Alien Families

When an illegal alien crosses the border into the U.S., he is a lawbreaker, and, like any lawbreaker (including American citizens), he is put into the criminal justice system.

This is the law.

Obviously, when an illegal alien is in custody, he is housed in an adult detention center. For obvious reasons, it would be illegal for Trump to “reunite” this family by allowing children to live in adult detention centers....

Keep in mind that when we are this early in the process, we do not even know if this is a real family unit. It is not uncommon for illegal aliens (including criminals) to pretend the children they are traveling with are their own....

 

3. The Left Wants Illegal Aliens to Enjoy Privileges Denied to American Citizens

If an American citizen breaks the law and is funneled into the justice system, he is separated from his family and children. This American citizen is not allowed to keep his family with him in a detention center....

 

4. Asylum Seekers Not Breaking the Law are Not Being Separated...

 

5. Trump Is Correct About the Loophole

In 1997, a consent decree called the Flores Settlement made it illegal for America to hold migrant children for longer than 20 days. Meaning, in order to keep the family together after 20 days of detention, we can either reunite the family by letting them loose to live illegally in America, or we can keep the parent in detention and place the child in a foster home or with a relative who lives in America.

Trump is wisely choosing to do the latter ...

 

6. "Reuniting" Families Would Be a Disaster for Countless Children

Again, the only way to “keep a family together” is to allow illegals to pour into our country....

 

7. Obama and Democrats Incentivized This ‘Family Separation’

Until Obama came along, illegal border crossings primarily involved young, single men. Obama incentivized the idea of dragging minor children along on this dangerous journey (where many children are sexually assaulted) through his policy of “catch and release.”...

 

8. Barack Obama Separated Illegal Alien Families, Media Said Nothing

Under Obama, when illegal border crossers were put into the criminal justice system, families were indeed separated. Obama, of course, rarely prosecuted, even though the law calls for it.

Neither Democrats nor the media cared about family separation then, which proves this manufactured and coordinated uproar is only about politics....

 

9. IMPORTANT: The ONLY Way to Unite Families Is to Release Them into America

... But when you hear the media call for these families to be reunited, remember that is coded language that means only one thing: releasing illegal aliens into our country with nothing more than a court summons....

 

10. Incentivizing the Act of Bringing Minor Children Across the Border Is Evil

... Evil people want these children dragged across the border, want this abuse incentivized by “keeping the family unit together,” because flooding the country with future indebted voters is more important to them than the safety and well-being of small children....

 

11. Those Who Come to America Legally Face ‘Family Separation’

 

12. “Family Reunification” Is an Invitation to Human Traffickers

Because of “catch and release,” because of this dumb and destructive loophole carved out for families, the number of illegal aliens using children to enter the U.S. increased by 315 percent between October 2017 and February 2018.

Trump understands what is happening and this is why he has moved to a zero tolerance policy....

 

13. Media Do Not Give a Shit About American Families Separated by Criminal Illegal Aliens

Illegal alien families are choosing to be separated by voluntarily engaging in lawbreaking. These illegal alien families, if they so choose, can stay together, simply by obeying the law.... Read more about 13 Facts the Media 'Pros' Don’t Want You to Know About 'Family Border Separation'

Here's the real story on migrant children separated from parents

As is usually the case, the latest Trump outrage as presented to you by the self-righteous media is not an accurate reflection of what’s really going on.

If you’ve been listening to the scandalized reports from the press and the outraged howls of Democrats and celebrities, you have the impression the Trump Administration is seizing migrant children, separating them from their families and banishing them to dark dungeons – never to see their parents again. And they’re doing all of this because they’re racist xenophobes ...

Is this even close to what’s really going on?

.... National Review’s Rich Lowry explains the truth about how this works, and under what circumstances, and why:

Separation happens only if officials find that the adult is falsely claiming to be the child’s parent, or is a threat to the child, or is put into criminal proceedings.

It’s the last that is operative here. The past practice had been to give a free pass to an adult who is part of a family unit. The new Trump policy is to prosecute all adults. The idea is to send a signal that we are serious about our laws and to create a deterrent against re-entry. (Illegal entry is a misdemeanor, illegal re-entry a felony.)

When a migrant is prosecuted for illegal entry, he or she is taken into custody by the U.S. Marshals. In no circumstance anywhere in the U.S. do the marshals care for the children of people they take into custody. The child is taken into the custody of HHS, who cares for them at temporary shelters.

The criminal proceedings are exceptionally short, assuming there is no aggravating factor such as a prior illegal entity or another crime. The migrants generally plead guilty, and they are then sentenced to time served, typically all in the same day, although practices vary along the border. After this, they are returned to the custody of ICE.

If the adult then wants to go home, in keeping with the expedited order of removal that is issued as a matter of course, it’s relatively simple. The adult should be reunited quickly with his or her child, and the family returned home as a unit. In this scenario, there’s only a very brief separation.

Where it becomes much more of an issue is if the adult files an asylum claim. In that scenario, the adults are almost certainly going to be detained longer than the government is allowed to hold their children.That’s because of something called the Flores Consent Decree from 1997. It says that unaccompanied children can be held only 20 days. A ruling by the Ninth Circuit extended this 20-day limit to children who come as part of family units. So even if we want to hold a family unit together, we are forbidden from doing so.

The clock ticking on the time the government can hold a child will almost always run out before an asylum claim is settled. The migrant is allowed ten days to seek an attorney, and there may be continuances or other complications.

This creates the choice of either releasing the adults and children together into the country pending the adjudication of the asylum claim, or holding the adults and releasing the children. If the adult is held, HHS places the child with a responsible party in the U.S., ideally a relative (migrants are likely to have family and friends here).

The media coverage tells you none of this, of course....

The truth is that when there is separation, it’s very brief, and every family that wants to come to the United States can easily avoid it happening by a) going to a legitimate port of entry instead of sneaking across the border illegally, and by telling the truth about who they are....

But much of America, including almost all of the media and just about every member of the Democratic Party, has stopped taking illegal immigration seriously as a crime. But the law says it is, and the border patrol is charged with treating it like it is....

  Read more about Here's the real story on migrant children separated from parents

A Civil Rights Commissioner Weighs In On Children at the Border

On Friday, U.S. Civil Rights Commissioner Peter Kirsanow wrote to Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen on the subject of separating families who enter the country illegally at the southern border. Peter’s letter is as clear an explanation of the issue as I have seen. It is so cogent that I am duplicating it here...

The reason parents and children are separated is the law: When an adult illegal alien is prosecuted for unlawful entry, that person is taken into the custody of the U.S. Marshals and the children are taken into custody by HHS. Nonetheless, unless the adult applies for asylum, the unlawful entry is resolved relatively quickly and the separation is brief. But if the adult applies for asylum, the process–-and separation–is lengthier. ...

The bottom line is that the Commission majority is opposed to enforcing almost any immigration laws pertaining to illegal entry. ...

People who have potentially valid claims for asylum can present themselves at ports of entry and request asylum. They will be processed normally and will not be separated from their children because they are following the law....

It is unwise to release detained individuals into the United States, because they are then very likely to abscond into the interior and fail to appear for their immigration hearing. “Over the past 20 years, 37 percent of all aliens free pending their trials – 918,098 out of 2,498,375 – never showed for court.”...

Separating children from their parents is regrettable. It is not, however, unique. American parents are separated from their children every day when they are arrested or incarcerated. According to HHS, during Fiscal Year 2016, 20,939 American children entered foster care because their parent is incarcerated. This is more than ten times the number of children who have been separated from their parents due to entering the United States illegally. People who cross the border illegally have committed a crime, and one of the consequences of being arrested and detained is, unfortunately, that their children cannot stay with them. ...

 

View the letter on ScribD Read more about A Civil Rights Commissioner Weighs In On Children at the Border

Children used as human shields against immigration enforcement

“We will not apologize for doing our job,” declares DHS Secretary Nielsen.

There is a coordinated effort now by some Democratic Party leaders and their allies to stop any immigration enforcement involving children.  Oregon’s Senators and Reps. Bonamici and Blumenauer participated in a demonstration in Sheridan OR this past week-end. 

In a statement released today (6/18/2018), Mark Krikorian, Director of the Center for Immigration Studies, analyzes the media hysteria created thus far and exposes the deceit and misrepresentation being used in the campaign.  Read the entire article, 'We will not apologize for doing our job' .

Below is an excerpt:

The manic wave of "concentration camp" accusations and Hitler comparisons is reminiscent of the atrocity propaganda that helped propel us into World War I (stories of Germans "bayoneting Belgian babies", raping nuns, and the like). Democratic politicians are weeping on television, staged photos are widely retweeted, and even former President George Bush's wife has penned an op-ed calling for a "kinder, more compassionate" means of enforcing our immigration laws.

The reality is more mundane. Border apprehensions of adults bringing children with them skyrocketed during the Obama administration, from about 15,000 in Fiscal Year 2013 (the first time separate statistics were reported) to more than 75,000 in FY 2017. Before the Obama years, it was rare for a parent to bring children with her when trying to infiltrate the U.S. border. No parent, after all, would subject her children to such risks unless there was an incentive to do so.

And that incentive was not flight from gang violence; research has shown almost everyone leaving Central America is motivated by economic reasons. Instead, the prospect of being released into the United States if you brought a child with you was what has caused the spike in arrests of what he Border Patrol calls "family units" at the border.

As the New York Times reported earlier this year:

Some migrants have admitted they brought their children not only to remove them from danger in such places as Central America and Africa, but because they believed it would cause the authorities to release them from custody sooner.

Others have admitted to posing falsely with children who are not their own, and Border Patrol officials say that such instances of fraud are increasing.

Children have served as get-out-of-jail-free cards for border infiltrators, ensuring the whole family's release with a notice to appear in immigration court some months or years in the future, and when they failed to appear, the Obama administration's prioritization rules meant no one would track you down.

When you reward something, you can expect to get more of it.  …

These problems could be fixed with legal changes present in both immigration bills expected to be voted on this week, as my colleague Andrew Arthur explained earlier today. The alternative is to surrender to the use of children as human shields against immigration enforcement, which will only invite even more widespread use of children as tickets to America, not only for Central Americans but also for illegal immigrants from around the world using Mexico as a springboard to sneak into the United States.

  Read more about Children used as human shields against immigration enforcement

Oregon Department of Corrections: Foreign National Rape Report April 2018

Information obtained from the Oregon Department of Corrections (DOC) indicated on April 1, 2018 that 173 of 970 foreign nationals (criminal aliens) in the state’s prison system were incarcerated for the crime of rape — 17.84 percent of the criminal alien prison population (Note: The number of criminal aliens incarcerated for rape in DOC prisons does not necessarily equal the number of Oregon residents victimized by the violent crime of rape).

Using DOC U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) immigration detainer numbers, the following table reveals the total number of criminal alien inmates along with the number and percentage of those alien inmates incarcerated on April 1st in the state’s prisons for the crime of rape.
 

OREGON DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

Month/Day/Year

DOC Total Number Inmates W/ICE Detainers

DOC Number of Inmates W/ICE Detainers Incarcerated for the Crime of Rape

DOC Percent of Inmates W/ICE Detainers Incarcerated for the Crime of Rape

April 1, 2018

970

173

17.84%

Source: Research and Evaluation DOC Report ICE inmates list 01 April 18.

Significant numbers, the 173 criminal aliens in the DOC prison system incarcerated for rape were 17.84 percent of all inmates, domestic and foreign, in the state’s prisons for the crime of rape.

Using the DOC Inmate Population Profile and ICE immigration detainer numbers from April 1st, the following table reveals the total number inmates incarcerated for rape, the number of domestic and criminal alien inmates incarcerated for rape and the percentage rapes committed by criminal aliens.
 

OREGON DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

Month/Day/Year

DOC Total Number of Inmates Incarcerated for the Crime of Rape

DOC Number of Domestic Inmates Incarcerated for the Crime of Rape

DOC Number of Inmates W/ICE Detainers Incarcerated for the Crime of Rape

DOC Inmates W/ICE Detainers as a Percentage of All Inmates incarcerated for the Crime of Rape

April 1, 2018

970

797

173

17.84%

Source: Research and Evaluation DOC Report ICE inmates list 01 April 18 and Inmate Population Profile 01 April 18.

Criminal aliens incarcerated in DOC prisons committed at least one crime of rape in 19 of 36 Oregon counties —52.78 percent of the counties in the state.

Five Oregon counties, Marion (49 rapes), Washington (43 rapes), Multnomah (26 rapes), Lane (14 rapes) and Clackamas (10 rapes) had 142of 173 criminal alien inmates incarcerated in DOC prisons for the crime of rape — 82.08 percent of the alien inmates incarcerated for rape.

Using DOC ICE immigration detainer numbers, the following table reveals the number and percentage of criminal alien inmates incarcerated on April 1st that were sent to prison from the state’s 36 counties for the crime of rape.
 

OREGON DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

County

DOC Number of Inmates W/ ICE Detainers by County Incarcerated for the Crime of Rape

DOC Percent of Inmates W/ ICE Detainers by County Incarcerated for the Crime of Rape

Marion

49

28.32%

Washington

43

24.86%

Multnomah

26

15.03%

Lane

14

8.09%

Clackamas

10

5.78%

Yamhill

7

4.05%

Jackson

5

2.89%

Benton

4

2.31%

Coos

2

1.16%

Deschutes

2

1.16%

Hood River

2

1.16%

Malheur

2

1.16%

Clatsop

1

0.58%

Jefferson

1

0.58%

Lincoln

1

0.58%

Linn

1

0.58%

Polk

1

0.58%

Umatilla

1

0.58%

Wasco

1

0.58%

Baker

0

0.00%

Columbia

0

0.00%

Crook

0

0.00%

Curry

0

0.00%

Douglas

0

0.00%

Gilliam

0

0.00%

Grant

0

0.00%

Harney

0

0.00%

Josephine

0

0.00%

Klamath

0

0.00%

Lake

0

0.00%

Tillamook

0

0.00%

Morrow

0

0.00%

OOS (Not a County)

0

0.00%

Sherman

0

0.00%

Union

0

0.00%

Wallowa

0

0.00%

Wheeler

0

0.00%

Total

173

100.00%

Source: Research and Evaluation DOC Report ICE inmates list 01 April 18.

Criminal aliens from 22 identified countries incarcerated in DOC prisons have raped Oregon residents.

Foreign nationals who declared their country or origin as being Mexico incarcerated in the DOC prison system committed 141 of 173 criminal alien rapes in Oregon — 81.50 percent of the alien rapes in the state.

Using DOC ICE immigration detainer numbers, the following table reveals the self-declared countries of origin of the 173 criminal alien inmates by number and percentage incarcerated on April 1st in the state’s prisons for the crime of rape.
 

OREGON DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

Country

DOC Number of Inmates W/ ICE Detainers by Country Incarcerated for the Crime of Rape

DOC Percent of Inmates W/ ICE Detainers by Country Incarcerated for the Crime of Rape

 

Mexico

141

81.50%

 

Guatemala

6

3.47%

 

Russia

3

1.73%

 

El Salvador

2

1.16%

 

Honduras

2

1.16%

 

Vietnam

2

1.16%

 

Wales

2

1.16%

 

Burma

1

0.58%

 

Cambodia

1

0.58%

 

Costa Rica

1

0.58%

 

Cuba

1

0.58%

 

Ecuador

1

0.58%

 

Ethiopia

1

0.58%

 

Fiji

1

0.58%

 

India

1

0.58%

 

Jamaica

1

0.58%

 

Korea

1

0.58%

 

Laos

1

0.58%

 

Malaysia

1

0.58%

 

Marshall Islands

1

0.58%

 

Republic of Congo

1

0.58%

 

Ukraine

1

0.58%

 

Total

173

100.00%

 

Source: Research and Evaluation DOC Report ICE inmates list 01 April 18.

David Olen Cross of Salem, Oregon writes on immigration issues and foreign national crime. The preceding report is a service to Oregon state, county and city governmental officials to help them assess the impact of foreign national crime in the state. He can be reached at docfnc@yahoo.com. His past crime reports can be found at http://docfnc.wordpress.com/. Read more about Oregon Department of Corrections: Foreign National Rape Report April 2018

Oregon’s Multnomah County Third in Foreign National Crime in March 2018

On March 1, 2018 Oregon’s Multnomah County had 196 of the 976 foreign nationals (criminal aliens) incarcerated in the Oregon Department of Corrections (DOC) prison system; the county was third in foreign national crime in the state with 20.08 percent of the criminal aliens in DOC prisons.

The following table reveals how Multnomah County residents were harmed or victimized by the 196 criminal aliens incarcerated on March 1st in the DOC prison system with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) ICE detainers.
 

OREGON DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

Crime

Total Number of Inmates W/ ICE Detainers in DOC Prisons from Multnomah County by Type of Crime

Percentage of Inmates W/ICE Detainers in DOC Prisons from Multnomah County by Type of Crime

Homicide

39

19.90%

Sex Abuse

32

16.33%

Drugs

30

15.31%

Rape

26

13.27%

Robbery

19

9.69%

Sodomy

17

8.67%

Assault

16

8.16%

Kidnapping

8

4.08%

Burglary

5

2.55%

Vehicle Theft

2

1.02%

Theft

1

0.51%

Arson

0

0.00%

Driving Offense

0

0.00%

Escape

0

0.00%

Forgery

0

0.00%

Other / Combination Crimes

1

0.51%

Total

196

100.00%

Source: Research and Evaluation DOC Report ICE inmates list 01 March 18.

This table reveals, using the DOC ICE detainer numbers from March 1st, the total number of criminal alien inmates incarcerated in the DOC prison system by type of crime from all Oregon counties, the total number of criminal alien inmates from Multnomah County in DOC prisons by type of crime and the percentage of those alien inmates who were from the county by type of crime.

OREGON DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

Crime

Total number of Inmates W/ ICE Detainers in DOC Prisons from all Oregon Counties by Type of Crime

Total number of Inmates W/ ICE Detainers in DOC Prisons from Multnomah County by Type of Crime

Percentage of Inmates W/ICE Detainers in DOC Prisons from Multnomah County by Type of Crime

Sex Abuse

206

32

15.53%

Rape

175

26

14.86%

Homicide

137

39

28.47%

Sodomy

104

17

16.35%

Drugs

98

30

30.61%

Assault

74

16

21.62%

Robbery

52

19

36.54%

Kidnapping

25

8

32.00%

Burglary

21

5

23.81%

Theft

13

1

7.69%

Vehicle Theft

6

2

33.33%

Driving Offense

4

0

0.00%

Escape

1

0

0.00%

Forgery

1

0

0.00%

Arson

0

0

0.00%

Other / Comb. Crimes

59

1

1.69%

Total

976

196

 

Source: Research and Evaluation DOC Report ICE inmates list 01 March 18.

The following table reveals the self-declared countries of origin of the majority of the 196 criminal aliens with ICE detainers who have harmed or victimized the residents Multnomah County in the DOC prison system.
 

OREGON DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

Country

Total Inmates W/ ICE Detainers from Multnomah Country by Country of Origin in DOC Prisons

Percentage of Inmates W/ICE Detainers by Country of Origin from Multnomah County in DOC Prisons

Mexico

130

66.33%

Vietnam

11

5.61%

Cuba

9

4.59%

Federated States of Micronesia

4

2.04%

Guatemala

4

2.04%

Honduras

4

2.04%

Laos

3

1.53%

Egypt

2

1.02%

EL Salvador

2

1.02%

Russia

2

1.02%

Ukraine

2

1.02%

Other Countries

23

11.73%

Total

196

100.00%

Source: Research and Evaluation DOC Report ICE inmates list 01 March 18.

Criminal aliens from 33 different countries have harmed or victimized Multnomah County residents.

David Olen Cross of Salem, Oregon is crime researcher who writes on immigration issues and foreign national crime. The preceding report is a service to Oregon state, county and city governmental officials to help them assess the impact of foreign national crime in the state. He can be reached at docfnc@yahoo.com. His past crime reports can be found at http://docfnc.wordpress.com/.
Read more about Oregon’s Multnomah County Third in Foreign National Crime in March 2018

Opposition to immigrant sanctuary spreading in California

SANTA ANA, Calif. (AP) — More local governments in California are resisting the state's efforts to resist the Trump administration's immigration crackdown, and political experts see politics at play as Republicans try to fire up voters in a state where the GOP has grown weak.

Since the Jeff Sessions-led Department of Justice sued California last month over its so-called "sanctuary state" law limiting police collaboration with immigration agents, at least a dozen local governments have voted to either join or support the lawsuit or for resolutions opposing the state's position. Those include the Board of Supervisors in Orange County, which has more than 3 million people.

More action is coming this week, with leaders in the Orange County city of Los Alamitos scheduled to vote Monday on a proposal for a local law to exempt the community of 12,000 from the state law. On Tuesday, the San Diego County Board of Supervisors is meeting to consider joining the Trump administration lawsuit.

Immigration has been a hot topic across the country since President Donald Trump campaigned in 2016 on promises of tougher enforcement and a wall on the U.S.-Mexico border. It has been a lightning rod issue in California far longer....

"When the attorney general of the United States decides to take a firm position against it, I think that gave a signal to a lot of us that, 'Hey, California is on the wrong side of this thing,'" said Fred Whitaker, chairman of the Republican Party in Orange County...

"Politics is very much about emotions, especially in midterms," he said. "I think it was only a matter of time when people went back to the issue that actually hits the nerve in the Republican base these days more than any other."

Under Democratic leadership, California has enacted a series of laws in recent years aimed at helping immigrants, including issuing driver's licenses regardless of legal status and assisting with tuition at state universities. After Trump was elected, lawmakers passed the measure to limit police collaboration with federal immigration agents....

Most of the local governments siding with the Trump administration are in Orange County, an area once considered a GOP stronghold but that voted for Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election. But it's starting to spread.

Escondido in neighboring San Diego County has voted to support the federal lawsuit and last week the small city of Ripon in the state's Central Valley did the same.

In many cases, meetings on the issue have drawn boisterous crowds. Anti-illegal immigration activists have traveled from city to city to attend...

In response to the controversy, some local governments have taken the opposite approach. Leaders in Santa Ana, an Orange County city home to about 330,000 residents, voted to support California in the lawsuit.

Some of the supervisors pushing the issue in Orange and San Diego counties are Republicans running for Congress and they may see this as a way to generate needed enthusiasm, said Louis DeSipio, a political science professor at the University of California, Irvine.

"The mobilization that could come from introducing immigration debates into county political races may be a critical element in a year like 2018 when Democrats will likely be more mobilized than Republicans," he said. Read more about Opposition to immigrant sanctuary spreading in California

The Dangerous Myth That Sanctuary City Policies Encourage Victims and Witnesses to Cooperate with Local Law Enforcement

Introduction

Since the election of Donald J. Trump as President of the United States, hundreds of cities and municipalities across the country have declared themselves "sanctuary cities." A sanctuary city is a municipality, or other state/local subdivision, that, by law or policy, prohibits local officials from cooperating with federal immigration authorities.1 In other words, it's a case of American cities blatantly violating federal statutes against harboring illegal aliens.2

Proponents of these policies claim that they do not interfere with federal law enforcement activities.3 Rather, they claim, such policies simply leave immigration enforcement to the federal government. But that is semantic hairsplitting. Sanctuary policies are nothing other than a deliberate attempt by state and local entities to impede the enforcement of federal immigration laws.4

State and local law enforcement officers are far more likely to encounter criminal aliens during routine job activities than are federal agents.5 As such, the ability of state and local law enforcement officers and government officials to freely cooperate and communicate with federal immigration authorities is not just important – but essential – to public safety.6

The Claim: Sanctuary Policies Enhance Information Sharing Between the "Immigrant" Community and Law Enforcement

The current model of policing management preferred by most law enforcement agencies is called “community policing.”7 It relies on the notion that police officers should be seen as part of the communities they serve and that they require the cooperation of victims and witnesses to solve crime and convict offenders.8

Sanctuary proponents claim that if state and local police officers are seen as “immigration agents,” then illegal aliens who are the victims of crime, or witnesses to crime, will not come forward to aid police.9 In effect, they are claiming that good immigration enforcement interferes with the ability of state and local law enforcement agencies to stop child predators, drug dealers, rapists or robbers.10

Why the Claim is False

1. There’s no proof. There is simply no documented evidence indicating that any illegal alien has ever been deported solely as a result of reporting a crime or volunteering information to the police.11 As a practical matter, when police are offered information about a crime, they do not inquire about the immigration status of the person volunteering it; they do not “bite the hand that feeds them.” Moreover, prosecutors have no interest in removing the witnesses they need to successfully obtain convictions against criminals.

2. Like everyone else in the United States, illegal aliens can offer information that may be valuable to police investigations on various anonymous "tip-lines." Jurisdictions do not need sanctuary policies in order to acquire information this way.12

3. Sanctuary policies don’t provide illegal aliens with any permanent form of immigration relief. The administration of our immigration laws falls solely within the jurisdiction of the federal government. State and local authorities cannot provide illegal aliens with any type of immigration status.13 They can only harbor illegal aliens and help them evade U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement – both of which are serious violations of federal law.14

4. The federal government administers a number of programs that allow state and local police to seek lawful status for illegal aliens who aid in the prosecution of criminals. Illegal aliens who have valuable information that they do want to share with law enforcement, but who feel nervous about doing so, have no legitimate concerns about being deported. If illegals provide helpful information to police, they may qualify for a "S," "T," "U" or "VAWA" nonimmigrant visa, which, in-turn, would allow them to apply for permanent legal status in the U.S.15 Where those visas are not appropriate, the federal government may also provide cooperating victims and witnesses with deferred action or parole.16

5. Most illegal aliens don't cooperate with police, even in sanctuary cities. The vast majority of illegal aliens come from countries where law enforcement authorities are either corrupt or serve as a tool of state oppression.17 They don’t suddenly begin trusting American police officers because of sanctuary policies.

And gangs – which are inextricably tied to crime in illegal alien neighborhoods – often exact retribution from anyone who is viewed as collaborating with law enforcement.18 As a result, most illegal aliens have no interest in cooperating with policing authorities at all.19 In most cases, they will only speak with investigators if they are likely to receive some form of immigration status in return for their testimony.

6. Sanctuary policies diminish trust in the integrity of law enforcement and may actually inhibit information-sharing. Community policing strategies were developed from a study called Fixing Broken Windows: Restoring Order and Reducing Crime in Our Communities.20 The authors found communities that discourage all public safety violations, from low-level offenses such as vandalism to administrative building code violations, are most successful in reducing serious crimes because they promote a culture of compliance with the law.

Conversely, cities that ignore and promote illegal immigration – usually for political gain – erode civic trust in law enforcement. They send a clear message that law enforcement agencies in sanctuary jurisdictions are willing to tolerate a certain level of lawlessness.21 The result is a chilling effect; fewer residents may be willing to approach police if they believe that officers are only willing to enforce certain laws against certain law-breakers under certain conditions. Uniformly enforcing all laws for all residents of a particular jurisdiction demonstrates integrity and fairness and fosters open dialogue.

7. Sanctuary policies increase criminal activity by illegal aliens. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, about 68 percent of released prisoners wind up being arrested for another criminal offense within three years and 76.6 percent end up being re-arrested within five years.22 Sanctuary policies shield illegal alien criminals from arrest and removal by ICE when they are released from local jails and state prisons. As a result, illegal alien criminals return to American communities, where they regularly commit new crimes.23 Many criminal illegal aliens seek out sanctuary jurisdictions because they know living in one significantly reduces the chance that they will be deported if arrested by local police.24 On the other hand, cooperating with ICE to identify and remove criminal aliens results in their removal from the United States, protecting Americans and lawfully present immigrants from further victimization.

How Many Criminal Aliens Are Allowed Back Onto Our Streets by Sanctuary Policies?

According to ICE estimates, roughly 2.1 million criminal aliens are currently living in the United States, over 1.9 million of whom are subject to deportation.25 It’s tough to determine how many of those criminal aliens have evaded capture by immigration authorities because of sanctuary policies.

Most correctional institutions distinguish only between American-born and foreign-born inmates. The foreign-born category includes illegal aliens, nonimmigrant visa holders, lawful permanent residents and naturalized U.S. citizens. Virtually none of the policing and corrections agencies in the United States keep clear statistics on how many illegal aliens they process each year.

Here’s what we do know:

• The San Francisco County Jail houses roughly 15,000 inmates during a typical year.26

• According to the Public Policy Institute of California, roughly 17 percent of inmates in the custody of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) are foreign-born.27

• Assuming only half of those inmates are aliens (as opposed to naturalized citizens), and that only half of those aliens are unlawfully present, the CDCR illegal alien population would be roughly 4 percent.

• If the San Francisco County Jail population breaks down in a similar fashion that would mean that the County of San Francisco releases approximately 600 illegal alien criminals back into the community each year, without informing ICE.

• The actual number of criminal aliens turned loose is probably much higher.

Consider that, in addition to San Francisco, a number of huge American cities like New York, Chicago and Los Angeles have also declared themselves to be sanctuary cities.28 That means that state and local governments are actively harboring thousands of illegal aliens each year and then releasing them into American communities, without so much as a nod to ICE.

Conclusion

Sanctuary policies don’t encourage information sharing between immigrant communities and local police. That’s because they don’t offer illegal aliens a path to any form of lawful status in exchange for their cooperation. State and local governments have no authority to confer any type of immigration status.

As such sanctuary policies just result in state and local agencies aiding and abetting illegal aliens as they continue to violate our immigration laws. And illegal aliens know this, that’s why they flock to sanctuary jurisdictions.

Accordingly, there is no reliable evidence that sanctuary policies have ever encouraged a single illegal alien to cooperate with local law enforcement authorities. But there are numerous examples of law abiding citizens who have become the victims of illegal alien crimes in sanctuary jurisdictions throughout the United States.

So – apart from buying into the sanctuary myth – what can a city do to foster information sharing and keep communities with large immigrant populations safe?

Recognize that many immigrants, both legal and illegal, are generally hesitant to provide information to police. This may be the result of experiences in their home country or a desire not to be perceived as a "snitch."

Ensure that local policing agencies engage regularly with immigrant communities and consistently demonstrate that American police officers uniformly enforce all laws for all residents of their jurisdictions.

Educate community members and law enforcement officers so they understand that, in certain circumstances, DHS may provide illegal alien crime witnesses or victims some form of relief from removal with an "S," "T," "U" or "VAWV" visa.

Abolish sanctuary policies and let ICE do its job. If the governments in sanctuary jurisdictions were really concerned about fighting crime, they would cooperate with ICE to permanently remove illegal alien criminals from their communities. Doing so would ultimately increase the number of resources available to deter crime because every dollar ICE spends removing a criminal alien from the United States is one that local communities don’t have to expend on criminal justice costs.

Although the federal government is responsible for regulating immigration, state and local law enforcement play an important role in helping to ensure that immigration law is effectively enforced. Illegal and unconstitutional sanctuary city policies undermine the rule of law and prevent local, state and federal law enforcement agencies from working in conjunction with each other as they should.

They put law-abiding members of our communities at risk. Kate Steinle was murdered by an illegal alien who was deported five times and had a lengthy felony record. Ms. Steinle is only the most recognizable of hundreds of Americans who have been killed by illegal aliens with extensive criminal records who should have been removed from the United States after their first conviction.

Tolerating illegal immigration and providing a "safe haven" for illegal aliens is unfair to immigrants who respect our nation's laws. In addition to waiting months or years to come here, legal immigrants abide by the entry, employment, health, and processing laws and regulations set by our government. Besides giving future prospective immigrants little incentive to follow the law, sanctuary policies are an affront to those who do it the right way.

Footnotes and endnotes

1Federation for American Immigration Reform, “State Sanctuary Policies,” https://fairus.org/issue/publications-resources/state-sanctuary-policies
2Offices of the United States Attorneys, “1907. Title 8, U.S.C. 1324(a) Offenses,” U.S. Attorney’s Manual, https://www.justice.gov/usam/criminal-resource-manual-1907-title-8-usc-1... and “1913. 8 U.S.C. 1327 – Aiding Entry of Certain Criminal or Subversive Aliens,” https://www.justice.gov/usam/criminal-resource-manual-1913-8-usc-1327-ai...
3Editorial Board, “When Cities Refuse to Enforce Immigration Laws: Is Chicago a Sanctuary for Nullification,” Chicago Tribune, March 29, 2017, http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/editorials/ct-sanctuary-citie...
4Federation for American Immigration Reform, “Sanctuary Cities: Obstructing Immigration Enforcement,” October 2, 2015, https://fairus.org/sites/default/files/2017-08/Sanctuary_Cities-Obstruct...
5Joel Gehrke, “Report: U.S. Spent $1.87 Billion to Incarcerate Illegal Immigrant Criminals in 2014,” July 28, 2015, https://www.nationalreview.com/2015/07/nearly-2-billion-spent-jailing-il...
6Federation for American Immigration Reform, “The Role of State and Local Law Enforcement in Immigration Matters and Reasons to Resist Sanctuary Policies,” January 2016, https://fairus.org/issue/illegal-immigration/role-state-local-law-enforc...
7U.S. Department of Justice, “Community Policing Defined,” Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, Revised Edition 2014, https://ric-zai-inc.com/Publications/cops-p157-pub.pdf
8James Q. Wilson, George L. Kelling, “Broken Windows: The Police and Neighborhood Safety,” The Atlantic, March 1982, https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1982/03/broken-windows/304465/
9Chuck Wexler, “Police Chiefs Across the Country Support Sanctuary Cities Because they Keep Crime Down,” Los Angeles Times, March 06, 2017, http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-wexler-sanctuary-cities-immig... and Debra A. Hoffmaster, Gerard Murphy, Shannon McFadden, Molly Griswold, “Police and Immigration: How Chiefs Are Leading Their Communities Through the Challenges,” Police Executive Research Forum, 2010, http://www.policeforum.org/assets/docs/Free_Online_Documents/Immigration...
10Tanvi Misra, “Harsh Policing of Immigrants Is Bad for Everyone,” CityLab, January 26, 2016, https://www.citylab.com/equity/2016/01/immigration-policing-enforcement-...
11Heather MacDonald, “Crime and the Illegal Alien,” Center for Immigration Studies, June 1, 2004, https://cis.org/Crime-Illegal-Alien
12Cynthia Lum, PhD, “Tip Line Technologies: Intelligence Gathering and Analysis Systems,” National Institute of Justice, July 1, 2005, https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/211677.pdf
13Todd Shepherd, “Term ‘Sanctuary City’ Is Misleading to Illegal Immigrants,” Washington Examiner, April 2, 2017, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/term-sanctuary-city-is-misleading-to-...
14Federation for American Immigration Reform, “The Law Against Hiring or Harboring Illegal Aliens,” December 1999, https://fairus.org/issue/illegal-immigration/law-against-hiring-or-harbo...
15Karma Ester, “Immigration: S Visas for Criminal and Terrorist Informants,” Congressional Research Service, July 19, 2005, https://fas.org/sgp/crs/terror/RS21043.pdf; Chelsea Phua, “Obscure Visa Helps Illegal Immigrants Who Witness Crimes,” Sacramento Bee, July 8, 2010, http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/arizona/immigration/obscure-visa-helps-...; U.S. Department of Homeland Security, “U and T Visa Law Enforcement Resource Guide,” https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/PM_15-4344%20U%20an...; American Immigration Council, “Fact Sheet: Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) Provides Protections for Immigrant Women and Victims of Crime,” May 7, 2012, https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/violence-against-wom...
16U.S. Department of Homeland Security, “Tool Kit for Prosecutors,” April 2011, https://www.ice.gov/doclib/about/offices/osltc/pdf/tool-kit-for-prosecut...
17Police Executive Research Forum, “Refugee Outreach and Engagement Programs for Police Agencies,” May 2017, http://www.policeforum.org/assets/refugeeoutreach.pdf
18Peter Finn, Kerry Murphy Healey, “Preventing Gang- and Drug-Related Witness Intimidation,” National Institute of Justice, November 1996, http://www.popcenter.org/problems/witness_intimidation/PDFs/Finn&Healey_...
19Kelly Dedel, “Guide No. 42- Witness Intimidation,” Center for Problem-Oriented Policing, 2006, http://www.popcenter.org/problems/witness_intimidation/
20George L. Kelling, Catherine M. Coles, Fixing Broken Windows: Restoring Order and Reducing Crime in Our Communities, Free Press, 1998, https://www.manhattan-institute.org/fixingbrokenwindows
21Jen Kerns, “Sanctuary City Policies Are Ruining California – Here’s Why I Left,” The Hill, December 2, 2017, http://thehill.com/opinion/criminal-justice/362940-sanctuary-city-polici...
22Bureau of Justice Statistics, “3 in 4 Former Prisoners in 30 States Arrested Within 5 Years of Release,” April 22, 2014, https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/press/rprts05p0510pr.cfm and, Matthew R. Durose, Alexia D. Cooper, PhD, Howard N. Snyder, PhD, “Recidivism of Prisoners Released in 30 States in 2005: Patterns from 2005-2010 – Update,” Bureau of Justice Statistics, April 22, 2014, https://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=4986
23Pete Hutchinson, “Dangerous ‘Collateral Consequences’ in Santa Clara County, California,” National Review, May 17, 2017, https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/05/immigrant-criminals-plea-bargains...
24John M. Morganelli, “Here’s Why ‘Sanctuary Cities’ Are Bad Public Policy,” Penn Live, July 14, 2015, http://www.pennlive.com/opinion/2015/07/heres_why_sanctuary_cities_are.html
25Federation for American Immigration Reform, “Criminal Aliens,” May 2016, https://fairus.org/issue/societal-impact/criminal-aliens
26City and County of San Francisco, “City Performance Score Cards – County Jail Population,” http://sfgov.org/scorecards/public-safety/county-jail-population
27Public Policy Institute of California, “Just the Facts: Immigrants and Crime,” June 2008, http://www.ppic.org/content/pubs/jtf/JTF_ImmigrantsCrimeJTF.pdf
28Bryan Griffith, Jessica M. Vaughan, “Maps: Sanctuary Cities, Counties, and States,” November 26, 2017, https://cis.org/Map-Sanctuary-Cities-Counties-and-States Read more about The Dangerous Myth That Sanctuary City Policies Encourage Victims and Witnesses to Cooperate with Local Law Enforcement

Oregon’s Marion County First in Foreign National Crime in February 2018

On February 1, 2018 Oregon’s Marion County had 235 of the 975 foreign nationals (criminal aliens) incarcerated in the Oregon Department of Corrections (DOC) prison system; the county was first in foreign national crime in the state with 24.10 percent of the criminal aliens in DOC prisons.

The following table reveals how Marion County residents were harmed or victimized by the 235 criminal aliens incarcerated on February 1st in the DOC prison system with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) ICE detainers.
 

OREGON DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

Crime

Total Number of Inmates W/ ICE Detainers in DOC Prisons from Marion County by Type of Crime

Percentage of Inmates W/ICE Detainers in DOC Prisons from Marion County by Type of Crime

Sex Abuse

53

22.55%

Rape

49

20.85%

Sodomy

33

14.04%

Homicide

23

9.79%

Assault

17

7.23%

Kidnapping

10

4.26%

Robbery

9

3.83%

Drugs

7

2.98%

Burglary

5

2.13%

Theft

3

1.28%

Driving Offense

1

0.43%

Vehicle Theft

1

0.43%

Arson

0

0.00%

Escape

0

0.00%

Forgery

0

0.00%

Other / Combination Crimes

24

10.21%

Total

235

100.00%

Source: Research and Evaluation DOC Report ICE inmates list 01 February 18.

This table reveals, using the DOC ICE detainer numbers from February 1st, the total number of criminal alien inmates incarcerated in the DOC prison system by type of crime from all Oregon counties, the total number of criminal alien inmates from Marion County in DOC prisons by type of crime and the percentage of those alien inmates who were from the county by type of crime.
<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]-->
<!--[endif]-->

OREGON DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

Crime

Total number of Inmates W/ ICE Detainers in DOC Prisons from all Oregon Counties by Type of Crime

Total number of Inmates W/ ICE Detainers in DOC Prisons from Marion County by Type of Crime

Percentage of Inmates W/ICE Detainers in DOC Prisons from Marion County by Type of Crime

Sex Abuse

203

53

26.11%

Rape

177

49

27.68%

Homicide

137

23

16.79%

Sodomy

101

33

32.67%

Drugs

100

7

7.00%

Assault

73

17

23.29%

Robbery

53

9

16.98%

Kidnapping

25

10

40.00%

Burglary

21

5

23.81%

Theft

15

3

20.00%

Vehicle Theft

5

1

20.00%

Driving Offense

4

1

25.00%

Escape

1

0

0.00%

Forgery

1

0

0.00%

Arson

0

0

0.00%

Other / Comb. Crimes

59

24

40.68%

Total

975

235

 

Source: Research and Evaluation DOC Report ICE inmates list 01 February 18.

The following table reveals the self-declared countries of origin of the majority of the 235 criminal aliens with ICE detainers who have harmed or victimized the residents of Marion County in the DOC prison system.
<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]-->
<!--[endif]-->

OREGON DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

Country

Total Inmates W/ ICE Detainers from Marion Country by Country of Origin in DOC Prisons

Percentage of Inmates W/ICE Detainers by Country of Origin from Marion County in DOC Prisons

Mexico

207

88.09%

Federated States of Micronesia

3

1.28%

Russia

3

1.28%

Cambodia

2

0.85%

El Salvador

2

0.85%

Marshall Islands

2

0.85%

Other Countries

16

6.81%

Total

235

100.00%

Source: Research and Evaluation DOC Report ICE inmates list 01 February 18.

Criminal aliens from 19 different countries have harmed or victimized the residents of Marion County.

David Olen Cross of Salem, Oregon is crime researcher who writes on immigration issues and foreign national crime. The preceding report is a service to Oregon state, county and city governmental officials to help them assess the impact of foreign national crime in the state. He can be reached at docfnc@yahoo.com. His past crime reports can be found at http://docfnc.wordpress.com/. Read more about Oregon’s Marion County First in Foreign National Crime in February 2018

Pages

Subscribe to RSS - ICE