dozens of dublin prison sex survivors face deportation
By Lisa Fernandez Published March 15, 2023 7:41AM KTVU FOX 2
DUBLIN, Calif. - The sex abuse between officers and incarcerated women at the Federal Correctional Institute at Dublin is well known -- it's been the subject of congressional hearings and earned it share of national headlines.
What remains in the shadows is how some undocumented and noncitizen women are being deported after sharing stories with authorities of sexual abuse.
Nearly three dozen women at FCI Dublin have either been deported or are facing possible deportation, even though their attorneys say that as sexual assault survivors or witnesses of this abuse they are eligible for law enforcement to certify their U-visas, which can provide a pathway to citizenship.
The purpose of a U-visa is to encourage crime victims to come forward without fear of deportation.
The deportation issue highlights a divide.
Immigrant rights advocates argue that the women have suffered enough – including retaliation in prison for coming forward – and have helped the federal government charge five correctional officers with sex crimes, leading to four convictions so far, including that of the former warden.
"It's not fair," Dolores Street Community Services deportation defense attorney Andrea Reyes Corena said in a recent interview. "The federal government has a responsibility and a duty to individuals who they hold in their custody. And federal employees committed these crimes. The federal government has to support those women to get the services they need and prevent deportation. This is just an additional layer of egregiousness when the crimes are perpetrated by federal police themselves."
The U.S. Attorneys Office counters that they have helped in some instances and they review each case on its merits. Legal observers note the federal prosecutors might not want to be seen as exchanging U-visas for testimony, which could discredit their witnesses on the stand.
35 women deported or facing deportation
A coalition of about 120 human rights organizations and prison rights advocates from Centro Legal de la Raza in Oakland to Rights Behind Bars in Washington, D.,C, have compiled a list of 35 women who said they were sexually abused at FCI Dublin, or have provided relevant information to federal investigators about the abuse, and who are now facing deportation.
At least seven women who were sexually assaulted by officers at FCI have been deported already and 17 more are currently in deportation hearings.
Another nine sex survivors who were abused at FCI Dublin and are now in Bureau of Prisons custody have immigration detainers against them, meaning that ICE will try to deport them as soon as they are released from prison.
Eighteen of these 35 women were interviewed by the FBI and the federal prosecutors, relaying their stories of sexual assault, the coalition of attorneys said.
Overall, 140 women have come forward to these attorneys with stories of sexual abuse over the last five years.
Federal prosecutors have intervened in at least two deportation cases.
Former FCI Dublin cook Enrique Chavez declines to comment after pleading guilty to fondling an incarcerated woman. Oct. 27, 2020
The organizations also provided some anecdotes of women they say were sexually abused at FCI Dublin and helpful to the government.
As one example, an incarcerated woman identified as T. was harassed by a kitchen worker for months, who repeatedly solicited her for sex.
When she refused to have sex with him, he hit her, the attorneys said.
T. also walked in on convicted former prison cook Enrique Chavez having sex with a woman in a closet, and saw another officer have sex with her cellmate.
T. reported Chavez and the other officer to Internal Affairs and the FBI and "faced relentless retaliation as a result," her attorneys said.
ICE has refused to release her from detention or halt her deportation, and federal investigators have not assisted her, her attorneys said. She is now being held in an ICE detention facility in Tacoma, Wash.
Immigrant women at FCI Dublin were specifically targeted for abuse, the attorneys said, because officers knew that began of their non-citizen status, they had little power or recourse.
"Federal employees specifically targeted non-citizen women because they knew that they had language limitations and might not report them or that they were going to get deported and then not be a problem for them," Corena said. "I mean, verbatim, he said 'You're no longer going to be a problem for me.' "
Former FCI Dublin warden Ray J. Garcia wheels out a caseload of files after taking the stand in his sex abuse trial in federal court in Oakland. Dec. 2, 2022
Case-by-case basis
For its part, U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of California spokesman Abraham Simmons told KTVU in an email that the agency considers requests for U-visa certifications on a case-by-case basis and certifies such requests "when appropriate."
For example, federal prosecutors signed a U-visa for a woman named "Maria," who was abused by the former FCI Dublin Warden Ray Garcia and who testified at this trial.
"Did the government request that your removal from the United States be paused?" Maria was asked at trial. "Did you apply for a U-visa?"
"Yes," Maria answered.
"What is the status of your U-visa application?"
"I truly don't know," she said.
And federal prosecutors asked that ICE temporarily defer deportation for another woman, only until after the Garcia's trial, court records show.
Garcia was convicted of seven counts of sexual abuse and one count of lying to the FBI in December.
Simmons declined to say more.
"The federal prosecutors have intervened for some cases," Corena said. "They have intervened to ask ICE to release some of the women who have testified, but not all. The federal prosecutors seem to focus primarily on individuals who they believe might be the most assistance to them."
Simeon Meyer, the jury foreman in the warden's case, told KTVU that his peers never seriously considered the women's past criminal history or the government's offer of a U-visa when they testified about their sexual abuse.
"We did go through a deliberative and eliminative process discussing possible motives," Meyer said, adding that the jurors considered the women's immigration status as one possible rationale for them speaking out. "But we ultimately overruled them because the evidence was so strong."
What are U-visas?
U-visas were created to protect noncitizen victims of crime from deportation, and encourage noncitizen victims to report crime to law enforcement agencies.
To be eligible for a U-visa, a person must have been a victim of a qualifying crime, have suffered physical or emotional harm as a result, have information about the crime and have been helpful to law enforcement. Sexual assault is considered a qualifying crime.
A U-visa applicant needs to obtain a certification from a law enforcement agency - such as a police department, prosecutor, judge, or prison officials - saying that they were a victim of a crime, and reported that crime to the agency.
A law enforcement agency can sign a certification even if no charges were ever filed, no prosecution or conviction resulted, the investigation is over or the case is closed.
Under California state law, law enforcement agencies are required to sign U-visa certifications if a noncitizen victim reports a crime, and are prohibited from refusing to sign the visa "solely because a case has already been prosecuted or closed."
Federal prosecutors and the FBI are not bound by California law.
"Any law enforcement agency can certify it," said Jean Reisz, co-director of the USC Immigration Clinic University of Southern California, who is not connected to the case. "So it could be the FBI, it could be the U.S. attorney's office. And all that is required is that the victim didn't fail to cooperate with law enforcement. So you don't have to testify in court. You don't have to be part of the allegations and the charging document."
Even if a U-visa is certified, immigration attorneys say it often takes between six and nine years to have that process formalized by the US Citizenship and Immigration Services. Only about 1/5 of the applications get approved.
And what if a woman lies about her sexual abuse, just to get this signed piece of paper?
"If someone were to come with a false claim, law enforcement could ultimately choose not to certify," said Reisz, who had no prior knowledge of the situation at FCI Dublin. "So I don't think it opens the door any more than just having this law opens the door."
Frustrations mount against ICE, closed cases
While immigrant rights attorneys also are frustrated with federal prosecutors, they are mostly upset with ICE, saying the agency isn't following its own policies and using the type of discretionary decisions they can make regarding victims of sex crimes.
An ICE spokesperson did not address any specific questions about why these women would be deported.
In general, the agency stated they are "focused on smart, effective immigration enforcement that protects the homeland through the arrest and removal of those who undermine the safety of our communities and the integrity of our immigration laws."
There are some women whose stories will never be vetted because the officer who allegedly sexually assaulted them is dead.
Several women who say they were assaulted by former FCI Dublin correctional officer Nicholas Ramos are now facing deportation, the coalition of attorneys said.
Federal investigators have refused to even interview these women, the attorneys said.
That's because Ramos died by suicide in August 2022, about six months after he and two dozen others were placed on leave as authorities investigated him for alleged sexual misconduct.
"They say, well, there's nothing that we can investigate at this point," Corena said. "But that doesn't change the fact that they were still victims of these crimes."
Reisz agreed.
"The fact that they aren't pursuing it or that he's no longer alive doesn't impact the eligibility for the U-visa," she said.
Chilling effect
Corena added that she understands to a point that prosecutors don't want to be seen exchanging testimony for visas.
But she said this approach could also backfire, and have a chilling effect on future cases.
Noncitizen women may not want to provide information and testimony about sexual abusers in prison, especially because the retaliation they face after reporting these allegations has been swift and severe.
"I think the government not showing a clear stand at supporting these women in a way that is robust," Corena said, "will really prevent more non-citizen women to come forward."
Lisa Fernandez is a reporter for KTVU. Email Lisa at lisa.fernandez@fox.com or call her at 510-874-0139. Or follow her on Twitter @ljfernandez
Denuncian deportación de mujeres inmigrantes presuntamente abusadas por agentes federales en la cárcel de Dublín
Por Flavio Lacayo, TELEMUNDO 48 • Publicado el 16 de febrero del 2023 • Actualizado a las 1:24 pm del 17 de febrero del 2023
In the news
BREAKING: Groups Challenge Trump Administration Rule Gutting Asylum (December 24, 2020)
For Immediate Release
Media Contact:
Blaine Bookey, CGRS (415-703-8202, bookeybl@uchastings.edu)
Sabi Ardalan, Harvard Immigration and Refugee Clinical Program (617-384-7504, sardalan@law.harvard.edu)
San Francisco, California (December 24, 2020) – Four immigrant rights organizations – Pangea Legal Services, Dolores Street Community Services, Inc., Catholic Legal Immigration Network, Inc. (CLINIC), and Capital Area Immigrants’ Rights Coalition – have requested a temporary restraining order in a lawsuit challenging a sweeping new rule that will eviscerate access to protection for people seeking refuge in the United States. Set to take effect on January 11, 2021, the rule completely transforms the asylum process, severely limiting the availability of asylum and related protections to individuals fleeing persecution or torture. The plaintiff organizations are represented by the Center for Gender & Refugee Studies, the Harvard Immigration and Refugee Clinical Program, and the law firm of Sidley Austin LLP.
“Published in the waning hours of the Trump administration, this rule marks its most far-reaching attempt to end asylum yet, and a death knell to our country’s longstanding commitment to offer safe haven for the persecuted,” said Jamie Crook, Director of Litigation at the Center for Gender & Refugee Studies. “The rule violates our laws, flouts our treaty obligations, and upends decades of legal precedent. If the mammoth rule is permitted to take effect, it will result in people being deported to face persecution, torture, and even death in their home countries.”
The rule deprives asylum seekers of any semblance of due process, imposing many barriers to relief before they even have the opportunity to present their case in immigration court. Among its numerous harmful provisions, the rule allows judges to deny an asylum application without holding a hearing. The rule also establishes 12 new “discretionary” factors that will bar many asylum seekers from life-saving protection. These include a de facto bar to asylum for applicants who pass through another country en route to the United States, effectively codifying and expanding the Trump administration’s third country transit bar, which the courts have already struck down as unlawful.
For those who are able to get their case before a judge, the new rule radically redefines who qualifies as a “refugee,” distorting the law so thoroughly that adjudicators can deny relief to virtually all applicants. The rule explicitly excludes from protection survivors of gender-based violence, children and families targeted by gangs, and people fleeing other abhorrent abuses. It also redefines “persecution” in such a way that judges will be directed to deny asylum even to individuals who have been detained and threatened with death due to their beliefs.
“Despite its enormous scope, the administration rushed this rule through the regulatory process without regard for its life-or-death implications for asylum seekers,” said Sabrineh Ardalan, Director of the Harvard Immigration and Refugee Clinical Program. “The administration chose to brush aside nearly 90,000 public comments raising serious concerns with the proposed rule.”
The plaintiffs in this lawsuit are nonprofit organizations that provide immigration legal services and have previously come together to stop other Trump administration attempts to erect unlawful barriers to asylum. They contend that the new rule will make it far more difficult to assist asylum-seeking clients and cause serious harm to the immigrant communities they serve.
The plaintiffs have asked the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California to issue a permanent nationwide injunction to prevent the rule from taking effect, arguing that the rule violates the Immigration and Nationality Act, the Administrative Procedures Act, the Due Process Clause of the U.S. Constitution, and the United States’ duty under international law not to return people to persecution or torture. On Wednesday the plaintiffs requested a temporary restraining order to immediately halt implementation of the rule while the court considers the case.
The plaintiffs also argue that the rule is procedurally invalid, as it was co-issued by Acting Department of Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf, whom multiple courts have declared was unlawfully appointed to his position and lacks the authority to promulgate such a rule.
BREAKING: Judge Stops Trump Administration Efforts to Bar More from Asylum (November 19, 2020)
For Immediate Release
November 19, 2020
Contact:
Rachel Cohen, rachel@immdefense.org, 917-370-8464
Sirine Shebaya, sshebaya@nipnlg.org, 202-656-4788
Etan Newman, etan@pangealegal.org, 415-652-0907
Philip Torrey, ptorrey@law.harvard.edu, 617-495-0638
Kate Mahoney, kate@dscs.org, 415-484-8630
Lynn Tramonte, ltramonte@cliniclegal.org, 202-255-0551
BREAKING: Judge Stops Trump Administration Efforts to Bar More from Asylum
Just One Day Before They Were Slated to Go Into Effect, Federal Judge Enjoins Broad Rules That Would Have Vastly Expanded Categorical Bars to Asylum
New York/Washington/San Francisco - On Thursday, a federal judge in the Northern District of California issued a nationwide injunction against the Trump Administration's new rule that would have dramatically restricted asylum eligibility for asylum seekers convicted of low-level offenses and even people who are not convicted of a crime. The changes were scheduled to go into effect on Friday.
The injunction comes after four immigrant rights organizations—Pangea Legal Services, Dolores Street Community Services, Catholic Legal Immigration Network, Inc. (“CLINIC”), and Capital Area Immigrants’ Rights Coalition—filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Justice earlier this month, challenging the rule. The plaintiffs are represented by the National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild (“NIPNLG”), the Harvard Immigration and Refugee Clinical Program, the Immigrant Defense Project, and the law firm of Sidley Austin LLP.
The court’s ruling protects the right to seek asylum in the United States. It halts the Trump Administration’s excessively harsh rule, which would have created broad bars to asylum based on low-level offenses and, in some cases, mere allegations. This new regulation was the latest attempt by the Trump Administration to dismantle asylum protections as part of its anti-immigrant agenda.
As the court recognized in its decision, the new rule would have deprived “valid asylees of ever obtaining asylum, regardless of whether they have rehabilitated themselves, regardless of whether their criminal conduct occurred many years earlier, or regardless of whether they have committed acts that Congress has said should not render one ineligible for asylum.” The TRO will remain in effect through December 9 when the Court will hold a hearing on the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction.
Click here to read the Order Granting Plaintiff’s Motion for Temporary Restraining Order.
Click here to read the original Complaint filed by Plaintiffs.
###
Please find entire press release here.
Immigration Groups File Lawsuit Challenging Trump Administration Efforts to Bar More from Asylum (November 2, 2020)
For Immediate Release
November 2, 2020
Contact:
Rachel Cohen, rachel@immdefense.org, 917-370-8464
Sirine Shebaya, sshebaya@nipnlg.org, 202-656-4788
Edwin Carmona-Cruz, edwin@pangealegal.org, 415-652-0663
Philip Torrey, ptorrey@law.harvard.edu, 617-495-0638
Kate Mahoney, kate@dscs.org, 415-484-8630
Immigration Groups File Lawsuit Challenging Trump Administration Efforts to Bar More from Asylum
Groups Say Broad Rules Could Bar Asylum Seekers Convicted of Low Level Offenses and Even People Who Are Not Convicted of a Crime
New York/Washington/San Francisco - Four immigrant rights organizations—Pangea Legal Services, Dolores Street Community Services, Catholic Legal Immigration Network, Inc. (“CLINIC”), and Capital Area Immigrants’ Rights Coalition—filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Justice, challenging a new rule dramatically restricting asylum eligibility. The plaintiffs are represented by the National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild (“NIPNLG”), the Harvard Immigration and Refugee Clinical Program, the Immigrant Defense Project, and the law firm of Sidley Austin LLP.
The lawsuit challenges proposed rule changes to the U.S. asylum process which are slated to go into effect on November 20. These rules are the latest step in the Trump Administration’s effort to drastically cut down the number of applicants and recipients of asylum protections in the U.S.
The U.S. has obligations under international law to make asylum broadly available, and to make any exceptions narrow and reserved only for the most serious offenses. The new rules drastically expand the current, narrow set of bars related to criminal convictions. The rules further restrict asylum eligibility by creating bars based on broad categories of low-level offenses, including using a false ID, that would bar asylum seekers from even getting a hearing on their application irrespective of the threat of persecution they face. Under the newly published regulations, an asylum officer or immigration judge can also categorically deny relief based on mere allegations of domestic violence even without a conviction, or based on convictions that are vacated or expunged.
The complaint filed today asserts that the new rule conflicts with the asylum statute, which incorporates international law obligations, and unlawfully “threatens to send bona fide asylum-seekers to countries where they will likely face violence, torture, and even death.”
Plaintiffs also assert that the rule is invalid because it violates the Administrative Procedure Act and U.S. Constitution in multiple respects, and ask the court to hold the rule unlawful, set it aside, and enjoin its enforcement.
The rules build on the systemic racism of U.S. immigration and asylum policies that have become increasingly harsh and narrow over the past several decades. These laws rely increasingly on fear-mongering and criminalization of immigrants. As the plaintiffs assert in their complaint, the rule will disproportionately impact individuals who are subject to racist policing and surveillance.
“This Administration’s relentless onslaught of attacks on asylum seekers continues to chip away at the limited due process available in immigration courts," says Etan Newman, Co-Director and Immigration Attorney at Pangea Legal Services. “The rule prohibits immigration judges from acknowledging the totality of a person's humanity and ability to rehabilitate. Because of our sanctuary policies that prioritize the health and safety of our communities, the San Francisco Bay Area has been a primary target of this Administration, and our communities would suffer particular harm under this rule."
“The new rule is another transparent attempt to demonize and deny protection to the most vulnerable individuals seeking protection in the U.S.,” said Katherine Mahoney, Litigation Director at Dolores Street Community Services. “It is a vast departure from decades of legal precedent, policy, and international norms, and an insult to what little due process still remains in our immigration system.”
Please find entire press release here.
Activists and organizers of all ages gathered in front of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement headquarters in San Francisco. Raising fists in solidarity and holding signs in support of immigrant families, protesters rallied.
“We will continue to resist through tears, through rage,” chanted demonstrators, some who carried signs.
Supporters and community members also came out to show their commitment.
“We’re here today cause there have been reports that raids [will start] on Sunday and they’re going to be continuing through the next week throughout the San Francisco Bay Area,” said Aradhana Tiwari, an immigration attorney for Dolores Street Community Services, “unjust raids that detain people and deny them complete due process.”
Because of his prolonged detention, Lopez’s case attracted heavy media attention and became the focal point of a debate on the indefinite detention of undocumented immigrants. Advocates argue that it violates immigrants’ constitutional rights and makes it extremely difficult for them to properly fight their cases.
Community members across the Bay Area rallied for Lopez’s release for more than a year, often protesting ahead of his court hearings. . . .
“His victory is symbolic of what many immigrants are experiencing, from indefinite detention to jail transfers and inhumane jail conditions,” said Juan Prieto, spokesman for the California Immigrant Youth Justice Alliance. “It’s a victory against all of the different injustices that we’re seeing come out of the executive branch from President Trump.”
A Richmond construction worker who has been detained for nearly two years while fighting deportation will get a bond hearing and a new chance for freedom, a San Francisco federal judge ruled on Tuesday. . .
In her ruling, Judge Kim said that Lopez’s prolonged detention was no longer justified. The fact that Lopez completed the first phase of an alcohol rehabilitation plan while in immigration detention, and submitted a detailed plan for further treatment if released, showed a “material change” in his circumstances that warrants a new chance for release, she wrote.
“Clients feel empowered by the people there,” said Lizzie Davis, a staff attorney with Deportation Defense & Legal Advocacy Program of Dolores Street Community Services in San Francisco. “A lot of immigration processes and procedures are incredibly isolating, especially for detained clients. Seeing supportive faces has a huge impact on them.”
Judges get the message as well, she and other attorneys said.
“To win bond, you have to demonstrate that you are not a danger to the community,” said Alejandra Rosero, another attorney at the legal nonprofit. “When the community shows up at hearings, it creates a huge impact that judges see.”
Supporters of a Richmond man who has been jailed by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement for more than a year and a half rallied Friday outside the U.S. Federal Building ahead of a hearing to seek his release.
Attorneys for Raul Lopez, 46, have petitioned his case to the Federal District Court, in hopes of ending his detention.
Friday, December 14, 2018
*** PRESS RELEASE ***
ATTORNEYS FILE HABEAS PETITION AND URGENT MOTION TO DEMAND RELEASE OF BAY AREA FATHER
Hearing Set For December 21, 2018 at 11AM
Daniel Werner, Dolores Street Community Services
Phone: 415-282-6209 x *156
Juan Prieto, California Immigrant Youth Justice Alliance
Phone: 510-414-0953
Lourdes Barraza, Interfaith Movement for Human Integrity
Phone: 408-508-9362
San Francisco, CA— Attorneys with the Deportation Defense and Legal Advocacy Program of Dolores Street Community Services (“Dolores Street”) announced the filing of a temporary restraining order in the habeas corpus petition of Raul Lopez Reyes, to request his immediate release from detention. The federal magistrate judge has set a hearing on Raul’s urgent request for December 21, 2018 at 11:00 AM at 450 Golden Gate Ave, Courtroom C, 15th Floor.
Dolores Street has been working closely on this case with the California Immigrant Youth Justice Alliance (CIYJA), the Interfaith Movement for Human Integrity (IM4HI), and the Contra Costa Immigrant Rights Alliance (CCIRA), organizations that have brought Raul’s case to the attention of the public and highlighted the impact of the immigration detention system on our communities.
This year, ICE shocked the conscience of the nation by streamlining the separation of thousands of children and families at the border until a federal district court put a stop to it. Less national attention was given to the children already in the country, including many U.S. citizens, who continue to be separated by their parents through ICE’s unchecked immigration detention system. This holiday season, at a time when many of us are coming together to spend time with our families and love ones, there are families like Raul's family that remain separated by a cruel and unjust immigration system.
Raul, who has lived in the country for nearly three decades, has been separated from his family since March 22, 2017. This June, his brave U.S. citizen daughter protested this injustice by celebrating her quinceñeara outside a local detention facility in Richmond, CA. Instead of releasing Raul, less than two weeks later, ICE transferred him thousands of miles away to Colorado, away from his family, and in tension with ICE’s own policies. Such transfers routinely occur with no public transparency. Since that time, ICE has continued to refuse to return Raul and has also denied his request for a bond hearing, despite the fact that his case – which has already lasted over a decade – has recently been remanded from the Ninth Circuit and could continue to drag on for years.
“This case exemplifies why the Constitution provides the right to habeas corpus to challenge unlawful government detention in court. Raul has been separated from his family for close to two years,” said Daniel Werner, one of Raul’s attorneys at Dolores Street. “This separation of families has persisted for far too long in our country. The government cannot simply lock people up in violation of their rights or move them away from their families and communities in an apparent retaliation for political activism. That’s why we’re going to court.”
For more information on how to support Raul visit the #FreeRaul facebook page: https://bit.ly/2LgaLvz and check out this video, produced by CIYJA, highlighting Raul’s case: https://bit.ly/2QI9AtQ
In honor of Father’s Day and in solidarity to thousands of detained immigrant fathers who have been ripped away from their children as they fight their deportation, Dolores Street Community Services joined forces with the Bay Area Immigration Bond Fund, Freedom for Immigrants, and the Bay Area Sanctuary Neighborhoods to launch the campaign #FreeOurFathers to bring fathers back to their children for Father’s Day.
Thanks to #FreeOurFathers and the support and resilience of the community, Jose— an immigrant father who has lived in the Bay Area for more than 20 years – regained his freedom and is back with his nine-year old daughter.
The Interfaith Movement has played a big role in organizing rallies and providing support for detained undocumented immigrants. At present, it is highlighting [Dolores Street client] Raul Lopez, a Guatemalan national who has lived in the United States for decades and has been separated from his wife and four children for more than a year.
At a March 13 telebriefing organized by Ethnic Media Services of San Francisco, Sally Kinoshita of the Immigration Legal Resource Center said it is possible that DACA recipients have options under immigration law that could help some people get access to green cards. “According to a recent study, the estimates are that about 20 to 25 percent of the undocumented population is eligible for one of the existing immigration options,” Kinoshita said.
Mission Local, ICE Raid False Alarms Throw SF Mission Community Into Panic
(Jan. 24, 2018)
. . .John O’Connell High School locked its doors and posted security outside, according to a source.
But the rumors turned out to be false alarms. Members of the San Francisco Rapid Response Network, a coalition of advocacy organizations, visited the sites and verified that immigration agents were not making arrests. The 24-hour hotline for suspected raids in San Francisco is 415-200-1548.
. . . “If you’re unsure then call the hotline to verify, and they will verify,” [Ana Herrera of Dolores Street] said. “That’s what we’re here to do. Don’t spread rumors just because you hear it from someone second hand.”
Contact: Ana Herrera, Dolores St. Community Services: 415-857-1935
The FREE SF Coalition -- including Asian Law Caucus, California Immigrant Youth Justice Alliance, CARECEN-SF, Causa Justa::Just Cause, Community United Against Violence, CA Immigrant Policy Center, Dolores Street Community Services, Faith in Action Bay Area, Immigrant Legal Resource Center, Interfaith Movement for Human Integrity, Legal Services for Children, Pangea Legal Services, SEIU USWW, and WRSF Labor Center -- issued the following statement today:
ICE's recent threats fit into a long pattern of manipulation, fear-mongering, and retaliation.
But no amount of bluster and intimidation can obscure the fundamental truth that immigrants are a vital part of our families and communities.
Cities and states that recognize our common humanity and refuse to help the administration deport millions of our neighbors are on the right side of history.
Now is the time for all people of conscience to step up and speak out. Together, we must resist and reject the Trump administration's political repression and vulgar racism.
We will use every tool at our disposal to protect every person who calls California home from federal abuses of power.
Community organizations have created a series of rapid response hotlines in Northern California. The SF hotline number is 415-200-1548.
Teenage Client Freed After ACLU Wins Relief for Immigrant Minors Jailed Without Due Process
(Nov. 30, 2017)
Dolores Street, along with Legal Services for Children and the ACLU secured release from detention for detained juveniles in special hearings pursuant to the ACLU-NC’s case, Saravia v. Sessions (Due Process for Immigrant Youth.
"Kelly Wells, an immigration attorney with Dolores Street Community Services, took on Rafael’s deportation case. But she said she ended up spending a lot of her time pushing jail officials to provide proper medical care." . . .
"Ongoing reports of inadequate care for immigrant detainees in California jails and private prisons prompted several state lawmakers to try to overhaul the state’s role in ICE detention."
"There's a massive pile of deportation cases, and a severe shortage of judges. That leaves some vulnerable people stuck behind bars. . . .
Because Magaly escaped domestic violence back home, she had a strong case for asylum in the US, says Alejandra Rosero, her immigration attorney, who works for Dolores Street Community Services in San Francisco. But because of Magaly's fake visa, detention center officials refused to release her—and that was just the beginning."
NBC Bay Area, Immigration Advocates File Police Accountability Complaint Following SFPD Deportation Threat
(Jun. 9, 2017)
"Civil rights advocates are calling for swift sanctions against a San Francisco police officer after an NBC Bay Area hidden camera investigation showed the officer threatening to deport a group of minorities.
Friday, the FREE SF Coalition called for Police Chief William Scott to discipline officer Joshua Fry alleging the officer violated San Francisco’s Sanctuary City policy.
'We are deeply disturbed by the recent undercover video that captured an SFPD officer threatening a group of Latino and Asian people with deportation,' the group said in a Statement. 'That an SFPD officer racially profiled and threatened people of color with deportation in perhaps the most well-known sanctuary city is shameful and an affront to our deepest values. Authorities must treat all people fairly, regardless of their background, where they were born, what they look like.' ”
“Mass deportation is against our core values as Americans and San Franciscans,” [San Francisco Public Defender Jeff] Adachi said. “Due process still means something in this country and we are not going to let the federal government ship off our friends and neighbors without a fight.”
Francisco Ugarte, who founded DSCS's Deportation Defense and Legal Advocacy Program, will be the managing attorney of the Public Defender's new Immigration Unit. Our program looks forward to continuing to collaborate with the unit in responding to the overwhelming need for representation in the San Francisco Immigration Court.
"Dennis Herrera, San Francisco’s City Attorney says sanctuary policies make all of the city’s residents safer."
DSCS Client, Eva: "I want to tell all those women who have been violated by those men, yes, we can continue to stand up for ourselves because this will always be a sanctuary city."
"Anyone who sees Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) activity in San Francisco can call (415) 200-1548 at any time. A call to the hotline initiates a process that includes nonprofits sending their own staff to the scene of the report to verify what happened, remind people of their rights, and if necessary, provide legal support."
" 'We want to let everyone here in San Francisco know that we have a system in place ready to respond, that they’re not alone, and that we’re a sanctuary city that cares about our immigrant population,' [Dolores Street's Marisela] Esparza said."
"It is essential that we prioritize this basic, due-process protection for San Franciscans facing deportation. Not only do they lose when they are deported, San Francisco loses as well."
Op-Ed Authors: Jeff Adachi is the San Francisco Public Defender. Niloufar Khonsari is the executive director of Pangea Legal Services. Ana Herrera is the managing immigration attorney with Dolores Street Community Services. Laura Sanchez is the director of CARACEN Immigration Legal Program.
American Immigration Lawyers Association Interview of the Month
(May 18, 2016)
Ana Camila Herrera, Managing Attorney, Dolores Street Community Services, a member of the San Francisco Immigration Legal Defense Collaborative, shares how renewed funding by the city for the SFILDC will help provide representation to unaccompanied minors and families in immigration court.