Leaders of a campaign to put tighter restrictions on when Vermont law enforcement can work with and share information with federal immigration authorities made their case to the state panel charged with making changes to that policy on Wednesday.
The No Más Polimigra movement is led by Migrant Justice, an advocacy group on behalf of migrant workers. “Polimigra” is a joining of Spanish words for police and immigration agents.
Supporters of that effort, including Will Lambek and Enrique Balcazar of Migrant Justice, urged the Vermont Criminal Justice Council during a video committee meeting on Wednesday to close “loopholes” in the current Fair and Impartial Policing Policy.
Lambek and Balcazar told the panel that the existing policy and proposed updates do not go far enough to prevent collaboration between police in Vermont and federal immigration authorities. They fear involving immigration agents in police matters will increase the likelihood of deportation and discourage migrants from working with the police.
“My community has suffered discrimination at the hands of the police, whether due to the color of our skin, the language that we speak, or nationality,” Balcazar told the committee in Spanish as Lambek translated into English.
“Our principal goal is that Vermont not expend its resources and not be a party to the persecution of our community,” Balcazar said, later adding, “We are hoping to be able to close these loopholes so that the policy truly protects immigrant rights and keeps Vermont police from being a party to the persecution and deportation of our communities.”
A working group has been working to develop an updated Fair and Impartial Policing Policy, but had been unable to reach a consensus on the proposals raised by Migrant Justice at the meeting Wednesday.
As a result, former Vermont Attorney General Bill Sorrell, the council chair, said the full board wanted to hear from the backers of those proposed changes.
He said the panel was not taking up the matter for action at the meeting Wednesday, but planned to do so at a future meeting, possibly next month.
Speaking after the meeting, Sorrell said he doesn’t expect unanimity among the 24 council members when the proposals come for a vote because the board members represent many different entities with different perspectives.
“I don’t know how it will break down, but they are interesting issues certainly worthy of consideration,” he said.
Lambek and Balcazar outlined the series of proposals they want in an updated policy, including preventing immigration authorities from accessing people who are in police custody.
Another proposal would keep Vermont law enforcement from sharing information about a person with federal immigration authorities unless necessary to the ongoing probe where probable cause has been found for a felony, and that investigation is not related to enforcing federal civil immigration law.
The statewide model Fair and Impartial Policing Policy was adopted by the council in 2017. That policy was approved over objections from advocacy groups for undocumented immigrants, including Migrant Justice and the American Civil Liberties Union of Vermont, who say that an earlier policy that had been in place had provided for the stricter restrictions.
Council members who backed the policy adopted in 2017 said at the time that they did the best they could while remaining in compliance with federal law. Imposing further restrictions, they contended, risks the loss of federal funds and legal action.
The statewide model policy serves as the floor of what law enforcement agencies around the state must adopt. Law enforcement agencies are permitted to adopt more restrictive policies when it comes to sharing information with federal authorities about undocumented immigrants in Vermont.
Lambek, of Migrant Justice, said he believed the proposals would withstand legal challenges, adding that in some instances there is unsettled case law from courts around the country.
“I recognize that there are complicated and vexing legal issues behind some of these (recommendations), although I do want to emphasize not all of these recommendations,” he said.
Lambek told the council that eight law enforcement agencies in Vermont, including police departments in Brattleboro, Burlington and Winooski, have adopted the more restrictive policies.
In none of those communities, he said, has adopting those policies led to lawsuits or the federal government pulling funding.
“So this language has been tested in the field. It’s tried and true,” Lambek said.
During the meeting, Lambek also cited a Vermont Public Radio report from Oct. 8 that outlines how a sergeant from the Orleans County Sheriff’s Department notified U.S. Border Patrol when he pulled over a migrant worker for speeding in Newport.
The sergeant said he initially called Border Patrol for help with translation services, a move that the ACLU says is a violation of the state’s Fair and Impartial Policing Policy.
Further, the worker was able to communicate with the sergeant via an app on his phone but the sergeant did not call off U.S. Border Patrol. Border Patrol ultimately did not make contact with the migrant, VPR reported. But Lambek argued the incident shows why Vermont needs a stronger Fair and Impartial Policing Policy.
Council Co-Vice Chair Xusana Davis, the state director of racial equity, said at the meeting that she was grateful to Balcazar and Lambek for speaking before the panel, and hoped it conveyed to others the importance of the issue.
“I think that we owe it to everybody who’s present in Vermont, regardless of their residency or any other statuses in the state or the country, to protect people,” Davis said. “Particularly, if we have doubts, ambiguities or other thoughts about federal policies, then we should act as such.”
