Research Proposal

Anna Bieganowska
G/T Intern/Mentor Program
2015
Research Title: Crime and Prejudice: The Changing Role of Detainers and How They Inhibit
Immigration Law Enforcement from Efficiently Targeting Criminal Immigrants

Overview of Research
Interest in the growing link between immigration and criminal law guides much of this research.
The fact that there is a greater amount of injustice in immigration enforcement as a result is
alarming. This often correlates with the contested and ever-evolving enforcement system
involving detainers and the programs that promote their issuance such as Secure Communities.
The most impactful of the effects of the modern detainer-based immigration system is the large
proportion of non-violent immigrants deported compared to convicted criminals and recent
entrants. Much time has passed without practical reform to address the consequences of detainer
requests. Considering this fact, this project digests the immigration enforcement process in the
United States interior under Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE; analyzes detainer
requests in terms of their impact on national security, local community policing, and an
immigrants constitutional rights; and offers support for a proactive method to improve
adherence to criminal priorities in the law enforcement process in place of detainers.

Background and History of the Issue

With the recent influx of immigration along the United States southern border as well as the
time-long debate over the countrys melting pot culture, the United States immigration
priorities have changed. In some communities, there is active public dissent over immigration
enforcement deporting neighbors and even naturalized U.S. citizens. In other states where state
and local law enforcement are affected by unlawful immigration overload, groups wish to tighten
laws to maintain the integrity of American borders.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement announced priorities for removal of mainly immigrants
with serious criminal records in 2011 in order to ensure national security, public safety, and the
integrity of [the United States] border and immigration controls (Morton 1). The Secure
Communities Program created by ICE, among other programs, assisted in connecting federal
immigration law enforcement and local criminal justice systems as the program identifies
deportable immigrants in jails or prisons through automatic sharing between their databases a
jail status check (Ewing 5). When ICE receives a database hit that an immigrant is not in
good status, an ICE officer increasingly relies on issuing a detainer requesting the state or
locality to notify ICE prior to releasing the individual so ICE may arrange to take custody

(American Immigration Council 16). There is an increase, under Secure Communities among
other ICE programs, more traffic or immigration offenders than serious criminal ones being
deported (Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse). This raises concerns that detainers
might actually inhibit compliance with criminal immigrant priorities instead of its opposite
purpose; even after just one year of the initiation of Secure Communities the majority of those in
ICE detention overall had a low propensity for violence (United States Immigration and Customs
Enforcement 2). In addition to these controversies, detainers began to gain public attention when
local jails began holding people under them for more than the legal 48 hours without probable
cause. The Department of Homeland Security used the Immigration Accountability Executive
Action in November 2014 in attempt to alleviate the problem, issuing new memoranda
discontinuing Secure Communities and substituting notification requests which involve only
information, not physical holding of immigrants in custody in place of detainers (American
Immigration Council 9).

Problem Statement and Rationale

Detainer-based enforcement is an important issue because of its widespread consequences.
Immigration affects the United States social, economic, and political base. Many immigrants
enter lawfully despite strict laws and others attempt to look for job opportunities or sanctuary
from a home countrys social problems, yet there are also individuals who bring crime and social
dissent. Detainers promote enforcement that does not focus limited enforcement resources on
criminal immigrants. They create mistrust, costs, and ultimately reduced public safety for
community police, the very agencies that ICE needs to cooperate with to discover and deport
dangerous or serious criminals in the first place. Because detainers also undermine basic rights of
due process, immigration enforcement is granted more power than criminal justice agencies,
which raises constitutional concerns and may affect how the world views the United States in
other political spheres as well. The question of how to address the immigration influx in a way
that reflects American values of freedom and opportunity without compromising the security of
its citizens is a contested but vital one; exploring the negative dynamics of detainers may prove
key to improving enforcement of immigration law into a more just system.

Research Methodology
Research Question and Hypothesis
How can immigration law enforcement practically prioritize criminal immigrants in a
consistent yet accurate way?
Holding ICE accountable through notification requests is expected to significantly
increase the proportion of convicted criminals and security threats deported as opposed to
the prior ICE detainer-based system.
Basis of Hypothesis

I focus my hypothesis specifically on detainer requests and the Secure Communities

program because those systems are where ICE often begins when addressing criminal
migrants and is a point to expand upon if prioritizing criminals. Because of the recent
news about inaccuracies and inconsistency in ICE policy implementation, such as when
U.S. citizens are deported, it is worthwhile to research ICEs main approach to
discovering immigrants and proposed changes as of late to not only promote increased
due process and save resources paid by taxpayers but increase accountability of
enforcement officers on what groups are targeted for removal as well as accuracy in the
Americas immigration system. Many U.S. localities criticize immigration detainers
because when ICE is involved in their communities, crime is less likely to be reported:
immigrant witnesses fear questioning of their status if they meet with police possibly
complying with ICE detainer requests. This suggests that immigration law enforcement
inconsistency is an on-going problem that will fester if not addressed, so looking into one
possible source of the problems detainers that provide that link between local criminal
justice agencies and federal immigration enforcement is useful. A movement to refuse
complying with ICE hold requests because of this community chilling effect bolstered as
a result and led to detainers replacement by notification requests as a possible solution to
the problems. It seems to me that immigration law enforcement is ad-hoc and does not
address the root of the immigration influx caused by illegal immigration because it
instead focuses on removing immigrants as a whole. With the new priorities under the
Department of Homeland Security with greater authority than ICE, there are clearer
guidelines addressing the previous deportations of those with minor traffic violations,
with significant ties to the United States, and/or those without any conviction whatsoever.
This has potential to increase awareness to assist in recreating immigration enforcement.
Research Design
I plan to conduct descriptive research, collecting qualitative data that compares past
priorities and immigration enforcement programs with novel ones under recent executive
action that calls for decreased reliance on detainers. Utilizing primary documents such as
administrative memorandum that affect how immigration law is implemented, I will
search for similarities and differences in immigration enforcement methods for
populations prioritized, conditions of discovering undocumented immigrants in the
criminal justice system through states and localities, amount of discretion affecting how
priorities might be enforced, and possible effects on abuse of the system hinted by
exceptions.
Operational Definitions
Accountable: For the purposes of the hypothesis above, accountability for ICE means that
officers actions follow stated administrative priorities with some discretion; energy and
resources are utilized solely on the basis of an immigrants threat to the community and
not factors such as race or availability in being physically found and picked up.
Accuracy: In terms of the hypothesis, accuracy refers to similar detention and/or
deportation rates for similar cases, reflected in more deportation of convicted criminals
and threats to public safety compared to low- or no-risk immigration offenders. If the

difference is significant between previous and novel programs in prioritizing criminals,

one is considered more accurate.
PEP: The Priority Enforcement Program is to replace Secure Communities; it still relies
on biometric data such as fingerprints taken during booking shared by state and local law
enforcement agencies with the FBI.
Secure Communities: Secure Communities was designed under the Criminal Alien
Program to identify removable immigrants in jails by sharing biometric data in FBI
criminal background checks with the Department of Homeland Securitys immigration
databases. It was discontinued on November 20, 2014. A database hit from the FBI
under Secure Communities was often followed by a detainer.
Detainer: An immigration detainer is a request by ICE to another law enforcement
agency to notify of a potentially deportable immigrants release from custody. This has
been contested as it may result in an individual being held days or weeks past their time
of release from criminal custody.
Security Threat: ICE defines a security threat as an individual that poses a serious threat
to public safety, ideally such as having tendencies toward violence and thus likely to
cause others harm.

Product Overview
I plan to compile sources utilized in real immigration cases and synthesize how they assist in the
legalization process. In this way, it may reach experts in the field who could utilize the research I
did so far as well as serve as a future reference for my mentor. I would like to provide my mentor
with it that it might contribute to more due process in immigration law and make future cases
easier to address.

Logistical Considerations
Time and research is necessary to compile the documents I have previously collected and
compliment them to general cases. It is necessary to consult my mentor on various cases to
ensure I can create a comprehensive product. Client confidentiality will also be kept in mind as
this may be an added element of synthesizing research.

Student Signature: __________________________________________

Date: _____________

G/T Resource Teacher Signature: ______________________________

Date: _____________

Mentor Signature: __________________________________________

Date: _____________