Federal judge won’t dismiss lawsuit against ICE in California. What happens next?
A U.S. District judge last week denied a government’s motion to dismiss a lawsuit against U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement over the agency’s use of private security guards to make arrests in California’s prisons.
The denial comes as a piece of legislation that would stop the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation from transferring individuals to immigration officials, altogether, awaits its fate from the state Senate.
The Asian Americans Advancing Justice-Asian Law Caucus and the ACLU Foundation of Northern California in February filed the lawsuit against ICE to get the agency to halt a practice they say is illegal.
The February complaint says the federal immigration agency uses private companies, such as G4S Secure Solutions, Inc., to detain people upon their release from the state’s prisons. The organizations have maintained federal law prohibits ICE from using security guards to carry out arrests.
Federal codes outline immigration officers who have the authority to make arrests. ICE officials hadn’t returned a request from The Bee seeking comment by Friday afternoon.
“ICE essentially conceded that using G4S, or other private contractors to make arrests, would be illegal,” Jenny Zhao, a senior staff attorney with Asian Americans Advancing Justice-Asian Law Caucus, told The Bee. “They didn’t dispute that.”
ICE, Zhao said, used a different strategy and claimed the agency had stopped using G4S to make arrests. After the lawsuit was filed, an ICE official sent an email to all field officers, instructing them all arrests have to be carried out by ICE officers.
However, Zhao said, her organization continued to investigate, and since the complaint was filed, they have found “numerous instances of people being arrested by G4S.”
They include arrests at Taft Prison and Wasco Prison in Kern County, as well as in Soledad Prison in Monterey County, she said.
“The judge ... essentially did not buy ICE’s story,” she said, adding her organization can move forward with the suit.
The next step will be to go into discovery, a process in which parties can obtain evidence from the opposing parties.
“We are pleased with the court’s ruling,” Zhao said.
U.S. District Judge Andre Birotte Jr. heard oral arguments on the case on Aug. 6, and issued a written order dated Sept. 1. He said the defendants deny a private contractor arrest policy exists, according to his order. But he says plaintiffs have laid out allegations supporting the policy’s existence.
“For example, Plaintiff alleges that the policy is reflected in the contract between ICE and G4S for the transportation of individuals in ICE custody,” the order reads. “ Plaintiff alleges that there have been repeated immigration arrests conducted by G4S officers over several years, as contemplated by the contract and other documents.”
The order comes on the heels of Assembly Bill 937, also known as the VISION Act, awaiting a final vote on the Senate floor. AB 937 seeks to stop the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation from transferring individuals to immigration officials.
Main plaintiff was Chowchilla prisoner
The main plaintiff in the federal class action lawsuit, Gabriela Solano, was transferred to ICE in late March upon her release from the Central California Women’s Facility in Chowchilla.
Solano, a lawful permanent resident, is now in Mexico, Zhao said, after she decided to accept an order for deportation because she was under much stress in ICE detention.
Solano is a domestic violence survivor, according to the suit.
“She won’t be able to get relief for herself through the lawsuit,” Zhao said. “This is a case where she was really standing up for the rights of other people who would come after her.”
Solano was granted parole after serving 22 years in prison.
AB 937 is “the type of bill that really would’ve helped Ms. Solano because it would have meant that after she was granted parole, she would’ve just been released back to her family,” Zhao said.
Zhao said she had heard Sen. Melissa Hurtado, D-Sanger, is currently a “no” on AB 937.
Michelle Sherwood, communications director for Hurtado, would only tell The Bee that the senator “won’t be commenting on the bill before it comes up on the floor of the Senate.” She said she didn’t know when that would happen.
This story was originally published September 6, 2021 at 5:00 AM.
.jpg)