By Diana Day

So-called “sanctuary cities” are a current hot-button immigration and national security topic. Critics claim that police policies, like Special Order 40 in Los Angeles, restrict the police and allow a city to become a safe haven for illegal immigrants. But supporters say that allowing police to act as ICE officials will increase crime rates because fearful immigrants would no longer report crimes to the police.
A current hot-button immigration and national security news topic is the issue of so-called “sanctuary cities.” The term is used by critics of policies that do not allow the police to question suspects about their immigration status. These critics claim that the policies, such as Special Order 40 in Los Angeles, restrict the police and allow a city to become a safe haven for illegal immigrants.

“[Los Angeles] is not a sanctuary for illegal aliens,” said Lt. Paul Vernon, the Public Information Officer of the Los Angeles Police Department, in a recent phone conversation with News 21.

Special Order 40, adopted in 1979 when Daryl Gates was police chief, sets forth that it’s not the job of the police to arrest people for being here illegally. The police are not allowed to go looking for illegal immigrants or to ask the immigration status of suspects.

“Your average person who happens into LA, we don’t inquire into their immigration status and especially if they’re not suspected of a crime,” Vernon told me.

Vernon said that police do not investigate or enforce immigration violations because of finite resources and division of labor. The federal government is supposed to handle immigration violations, and the LAPD’s limited budget does not provide resources to handle immigration problems. But more importantly, perhaps – at least, the reason most cited in the media for Special Order 40 — is that the police don’t want to discourage illegal aliens from reporting crimes.

“There are drawbacks to making people feel afraid of the police for the wrong reasons … Because when people don’t report crime, that contributes to a rise in crime,” Lt. Vernon explained.

In a recent LA Times article, LAPD Assistant Chief George Gascon put it bluntly: “‘It’s not a matter of politics. It’s a matter of practical policing. … If an undocumented woman is raped and doesn’t report it, the suspect who raped that woman, remember, could be the suspect who rapes someone else’s sister, mother or wife later.’”

This reason for Special Order 40’s adoption is supported by “A Report to the Los Angeles Board of Police Commissioners Concerning Special Order 40” from February 1, 2001. But according to the report — written to reaffirm the LAPD’s support for 40 in the face of criticism about the department’s level of compliance with and the scope of the order — Special Order 40 was also adopted in 1979 because, “Many in the communities served by the LAPD believed that [police checking of immigrant status] led to widespread abuse, and Latino citizens, legal immigrants and undocumented persons felt intimidated and threatened by the very officers who were charged with their protection.”

Currently, Lt. Vernon explained, one of Bratton’s main goals is to strengthen the counter-terrorism functions of the LAPD, and includes clarifying Special Order 40. The intent of 40, according to Lt. Vernon, was never to ignore illegality, but it did intend to restrict police from asking people’s legal status when they call for help or when there is no crime suspected.

The clarifications will elaborate upon the certain circumstances where LAPD officers can investigate an immigrant’s status. From a follow-up e-mail from Lt. Vernon: “Officers don’t conduct immigration investigations in and of themselves. Their attention to an illegal alien suspect would occur as part of a larger criminal investigation, because that person was implicated in some crime. If we don’t have a specific crime, but think that person is involved in criminal activity, a supervisor could approach ICE to assess their interest in this person, should he be arrested. LAPD officers would not arrest a person on an immigration violation unless the federal authorities had a specific demand (want or warrant) for that person.”

Additionally, details for cooperating and sharing information with federal agencies will be clarified, especially given the cooperative post-9/11 climate for sharing information across local, state and national levels. According to The Daily News, “supervisors can notify federal authorities of an arrestee’s undocumented status when they have been picked up on suspicion of serious offenses. … in some cases officers can also contact the federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency before an arrest.”

And the LAPD will enforce illegal IDs since identity theft is rampant, Lt. Vernon said.

These actions, according to Lt. Vernon, aren’t changing Special Order 40 but are clarifying the intent that was always there and remains there.
The LAPD’s clarifications of Special Order 40 are taking place at a time when the Orange County Sheriff’s Department and the Costa Mesa Police Department are both making dramatic changes in how the police handle immigrations violations. Both departments are developing policies where some of their officers will receive training from the federal government in order to function, essentially, as an immigration official.

Immigrants’ rights groups and civil rights groups, like the ACLU, are not in favor of the police acting as ICE agents because they fear police will abuse their new powers. At a “Know Your Rights” workshop Saturday sponsored by the Islamic Shura Council of Southern California, ACLU lawyer Ahilan Arulanantham stated that the ACLU is trying to stop the types of plans proposed by Costa Mesa.

Proponents of plans like Costa Mesa’s, like Jack Dunphy of the LAPD (“Jack Dunphy” is the pen name of an LAPD officer who writes a column for the National Review), criticize Special Order 40 for tying the hands of police in the face of what Manhattan Institute Fellow Heather MacDonald describes as an “illegal alien crime wave.” According to MacDonald’s figures, 23 percent of Los Angeles County jail’s inmates in 2000 were deportable, and in the first half of 2004, 95 percent of all outstanding homicide warrants in Los Angeles were for illegal aliens. Other proponents, like political science professor Edward Erler, claim that Special Order 40 is illegal because it conflicts with two laws passed by Congress in 1996. The laws, according to Erler, said that “state and local governments could no longer prohibit employees from inquiring about immigration status or tipping off immigration authorities.”

While Lt. Vernon would not directly criticize the approaches taken by Orange County and Costa Mesa, he reiterated the point that crime rates will go up if people are afraid to report crimes.

Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, Sheriff Lee Baca and police Chief William Bratton have come out in favor of Special Order 40.

The Daily News reported that the LAPD will present a final draft of its clarifications of Special Order 40 to the police commission for its approval in March or April.
Non-linked sources:

• Lt. Paul Vernon, LAPD
• ACLU lawyer Ahilan Arulanantham