,
51 tweets,
8 min read
Read on Twitter
also happening today in charlottesville: a special meeting of the jail board at the albemarle charlottesville regional jail to discuss (possible dis)continuation of their policy of cooperation with ICE re: voluntary notifications sent to ICE when people are released.
notes from the january jail board meeting when they last voted in favor of this policy are here:
notes from the july jail board meeting which prompted this month's special meeting to discuss the policy again:
arriving at the jail now. my understanding is that we’ll get a presentation from ICE and discussion from the board, but no vote today. i’ll only be here for the first hour (not sure how long it’ll be) — gotta get to the courthouse for goodwin’s sentencing at 2.
this is the 3rd jail board hearing i’ve been to this year & the 3rd one i’ve listened to from the outdoor meeting overflow area. you’d think they could hold these meetings someplace other than a tiny room inside the jail so the public could actually attend these public meetings.
diantha mckeel, the board chair & member of the albemarle co BOS, is back this time. she was away on the pilgrimage during the last meeting - hopefully she experienced a change of heart on what i’m told was a very moving tric-ville.com/charlottesvill…F6yq
staring off with the board’s questions: “does section 1 of the 14th amendment of the constitution apply to immigrants? why or why not?”
y i k e s
y i k e s
unclear who is responding (the outdoor seating area makes it hard to tell): “various supreme court decisions” confirm that the 5th and 14th amendment apply to “all persons entitled to due process.”
“i would answer yes, in the affirmative”
“i would answer yes, in the affirmative”
another attorney: “it all hinges on the word PERSON.”
from a supreme court decision: “whatever his status under immigration law, an alien is a person.”
from a supreme court decision: “whatever his status under immigration law, an alien is a person.”
next question: “how does evidence based decision making influence your process?”
ICE: “we take a very holistic approach to everybody that we encounter. we look at a multitude of factors.”
ICE: “we take a very holistic approach to everybody that we encounter. we look at a multitude of factors.”
ICE: “every individual is evaluated on a myriad of factors.”
he made exactly zero concrete statements about evidence based decision making.
he made exactly zero concrete statements about evidence based decision making.
if an immigration judge makes a decision about an individual, it can be appealed... (but that isn’t what we’re talking about? we’re talking about voluntary notifications by the jail to ICE?)
“there’s information that’s being withheld from local authorities here.”
one of the goals of the EBDM team (evidence based decision making) is harm reduction & building trust in the community - this policy isn’t consistent with that.
one of the goals of the EBDM team (evidence based decision making) is harm reduction & building trust in the community - this policy isn’t consistent with that.
if these individuals are as dangerous as ICE claims, they can get criminal warrants, but that’s not what we’re seeing here.
ICE alluded heavily in previous meetings to the fact that they have information about these individuals that local law enforcement wouldn’t have access to — the board presses for elaboration on this.
ICE rep cites vague, scary sounding “national security” issues 🙄
“the united states’ international obligation is to protect refugees,” says the ICE agent. everyone present then burst into flames processing the irony.
“there is no judge for ICE officers to seek a judicial warrant from — this is the system that congress designed.”
seems like a bad system.
seems like a bad system.
“you can’t flout the criminal justice system that we have set up”
information that is “too sensitive” can remain under seal - but it should still go before a judge for a warrant.
information that is “too sensitive” can remain under seal - but it should still go before a judge for a warrant.
“we aren’t asking the jail to make an exception to a rule, we’re asking the jail not to make an exception to a rule we don’t even make for the FBI”
the meeting is being broadcast to TVs in the outdoor seating area, but i’m not entirely sure if it’s being recorded for public viewing later or broadcast elsewhere — @CvilleCityHall can you clarify?
wes asks how an ICE officer can tell by looking at someone if they’re doing something to warrant detention.
“it’s interaction with the immigration system. it’s other evidence.”
“it’s interaction with the immigration system. it’s other evidence.”
wes is gently pushing to get the ICE representative to admit to racial profiling.
“absolutely not!” the ICE rep says.
“absolutely not!” the ICE rep says.
“it’s objective. it’s evidence based decision making.” “there’s a lot of other factors that go into it.”
this man has yet to make a single concrete statement.
this man has yet to make a single concrete statement.
“is the jail board going to make individual determinations... or continue a policy of cooperation and let the appropriate officials make those determinations?” (which bootlicker said this?)
mike murphy: what are the components of the “holistic review” process? are we talking about a tool? is it an assessment made by individual officers? is it consistent? has it been validated?
“who gets picked up and what the underlying charges are” exposed some inconsistencies with the process they’re describing.
interim city mike murphy showing some bureaucratic teeth for once?
interim city mike murphy showing some bureaucratic teeth for once?
it’s been a while since i read arendt’s banality of evil in undergrad, but i think this ICE representative is summarizing it nicely for the jail board right now.
mike murphy: what i didn’t hear was any discussion of risk to the community.
ICE: “it’s all part of the bigger picture.”
he’s equating undocumented status WITH risk to the community, that their undocumented status itself is the risk. it isn’t.
ICE: “it’s all part of the bigger picture.”
he’s equating undocumented status WITH risk to the community, that their undocumented status itself is the risk. it isn’t.
not sure who said this but: “you’re just picking people up based on whether you have enough staff to come pick them up” and the risk assessment is done AFTER that.
another voice in the room, of the statements ICE made: “let’s fact check a few of those statements.”
i’ve said it before and i’ll say it again: the people of charlottesville have gone full ACAB and it’s fucking incredible.
“this is just a back and forth rebuttal... can’t we just move on?” isn’t this discussion the point of this work session?!
“y’all were trying to make out that these aren’t real warrants, that they’re a bunch of bull, but it’s my understanding now that they are real warrants...” one member of the board is very resistant to the pushback against ICE. (i wish i were in the room & could tell WHO)
(i can only tell who’s speaking when it’s a voice i recognize, like wes’ or the board chair. the camera angle on the room is just the backs of one side of a u-shaped panel)
“it’s arbitrary in practice.” “there’s a detention bed mandate - congress sets that number every year” “no other agency is required to maintain a set number of detention beds”
“there’s an incentive. there’s a big [funding] incentive here.”
“there’s an incentive. there’s a big [funding] incentive here.”
a local attorney: “we are hurting our public safety by implanting this policy” says clients call her instead of the police because they associate law enforcement with ICE and don’t trust them.
one benefit to the overflow seating area is that the gallery (and it’s packed!) gets to react angrily when that fucking fascist from ICE spews dangerous xenophobic lies.
“not every encounter results in an arrest, not every arrest results in a detention.”
“we may go back and reevaluate if there was new evidence...”
oh you mean like this?
latimes.com/local/lanow/la…
“we may go back and reevaluate if there was new evidence...”
oh you mean like this?
latimes.com/local/lanow/la…
wes: they aren’t doing their evaluation until AFTER detaining someone “the devastation, the impact, has already been done. after you remove the individual from this community, sometimes they can’t come back from that.”
ICE, wearily: “i recognize this is a very passionate topic.”
ICE, wearily: “i recognize this is a very passionate topic.”
asked directly if they are doing their a evaluation before detaining people, he equivocates: “there’s a finite amount of resources.”
“how does the notification process keep us safe in practice?”
“there’s no inherent danger based solely upon citizenship status.”
“what i’m not hearing how this is really benefiting our local public safety.”
“there’s no inherent danger based solely upon citizenship status.”
“what i’m not hearing how this is really benefiting our local public safety.”
i’m starting to get antsy about making my next appointment - goodwin’s sentencing at 2 downtown. i hate to miss the end of this discussion...
25% of people picked up by ICE under this policy locally were picked up pre-trial.
“if they want to change federal law, there’s a procedure for that, but we’re not going to do that today”
(we aren’t talking about changing the law, we’re talking about ending an optional local policy)
(we aren’t talking about changing the law, we’re talking about ending an optional local policy)
nelson county commonwealth’s attorney defends ICE, speaks proudly about his frequent cooperation with ICE.
a local attorney is going to the mat with rutherford, the nelson commonwealth’s attorney. not sure who she is, but good on her. that man is proud of his misdeeds and at the january jail board hearing suggested EXPANDING the jail’s cooperation with ICE in unconstitutional ways.
hell yeah LAJC. thank you for the work you do in our community.
was that mike murphy pointing out that immigration facilities get reimbursed at 3x the rate of the local jail? yikes. we CANNOT have this conversation without talking about the financial incentives for this terror.
ok, as much as i hate to miss the end of this meeting, i have another appointment to keep. godspeed to those sticking it out here.
ah yes, a holistic, thorough evidence based assessment that always returns the same result 😒
