Public Comment: Is it the Policy of This Town to Hold Federal Immigration Officials Accountable Under the Law?

By Rani Parker and  J. Patrick Meagher

The following public comment was read at the special joint meeting of the Amherst Town Council, Community Safety and Social Justice Committee and the Human Rights Commission.

I would like to begin my comments by thanking the town manager and the various town staff members who reviewed our questions and prepared this response. I’m also very grateful to the many Amherst residents who have set aside your busy lives for this moment, to show up and express your point of view. Civic participation is a well-established human right, and it is important that we can claim it.

For the record, I would like to note that there are a number of questions, such as about the status of a Flock camera in Amherst, that have not been answered. I suspect others will raise these questions.

I want to address my response from a personal perspective. Since last Fall, I don’t drive as much as I used to. I don’t drive even one mile above the speed limit. Why? I have learned that stopping people on the road is one of the most common ways that law abiding citizens like me can get pulled into a system that could label me a criminal. Stopping me for how I look is not a crime according to our Supreme Court. So, every time I get into the car, first I make sure I need to drive; then I check to make sure the LUCE hotline is on the screen of my phone, so if I need help, I don’t have to search for it. I have a copy of my passport in my wallet. I am supposed to be safe – I have been a citizen for more than 40 years; I am a person who has never violated the smallest of laws; one who has also contributed my time and capacities as a volunteer since I was 16, and I can afford to hire a lawyer if needed. Still, I am here today to tell you I do not feel safe because I am not safe because of how I look. And I am not alone.

So I am sensitive to the idea that our fears are hypothetical, not real, but imagined scenarios not worthy of response. Imagine how much worse it is for the Amherst residents with legal status who have their status revoked arbitrarily, then reinstated, then revoked, deadlines changed, reporting requirements changed, etc. The Office of Refugees and Immigrants (ORI) recently advised asylum seekers and people with various visas to check their accounts not once every few weeks as before, but every single day because of the constant changes of status and tight deadlines for response. All these individuals, including many in Amherst, a town packed with people from all over the world who are students and faculty, farm workers and small business owners, are vulnerable. What is the town’s obligation to all these individuals?

I am not asking for the APD to confront federal agents.

The comments and questions presented to the town manager and our safety departments, the APD and CRESS, boil down to this: Is it the policy of the town, to hold federal immigration agents accountable under the law? There is no need to get into hypotheticals in order to answer this question. 

What town residents need to know is whether, as a matter of policy, the town will take action against immigration agents who are acting beyond their authority, breaking the law (federal, state, and local), or otherwise endangering the public. This means no more than applying the town’s policing authority – the very same authority asserted in every other local circumstance – to federal immigration agents. Breaches by these agents might include conducting raids while wearing masks, entering non-public spaces without judicial warrants, pursuing or detaining people without probable cause (this would include threatening to imprison or deport individuals with no criminal record), disturbing the peace, and using excessive force. 

Underlying this use of the town’s authority are its “police powers” under the U.S. Constitution, federal and state laws, and the Town Charter. Asserting these powers would mean a refusal to accept the unprecedented broad claims of authority and immunity by the Trump administration – claims that have been and are still being litigated (i.e., are not accepted as a matter of settled law). Federal authorities such as DHS (the Department of Homeland Security) can assert the preemptive authority of federal law vis-a-vis state and local law, but Amherst is not required to accept those assertions at face value. Indeed, the presumption should be exactly the opposite – that those assertions of power are bogus, not justified under the laws, and made in bad faith.

So, the question really is whether Amherst will do the maximum possible within its authority to protect the public by preventing and punishing lawless action by federal immigration agents carried out in the town – even if this means challenging armed ICE agents. Police forces around the world confront armed malefactors all the time. Should we expect any less from Amherst and its police force?

Rani Parker and J. Patrick Meagher are residents of Amherst. Parker is chair of the town’s Human Rights Commission.