EXIT

News > Immigration In Minnesota

Ellison questions Stanek policies on immigrants

Posted on Jul 27 2017

Minnesota Congressional Representative Keith Ellison is challenging Hennepin County Sheriff Rich Stanek over jail policies that help Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

Stanek’s jail policies help locate and deport immigrants, whether they are documented or undocumented. Whenever a foreign-born inmate is booked into Hennepin County Jail, the jail alerts ICE, according to a July 26 report in the Star Tribune:

“When deputies book inmates, they ask for their city of birth and citizenship. Stanek says inquiring about birthplaces is required by Minnesota statutes and allows his office to notify consulates. With foreign-born inmates, deputies call ICE and sometimes put that inmate on the phone with an ICE agent.

“The jail also provides ICE agents space to meet with inmates and notifies the agency when an inmate with an ICE detainer is about to be released.”

Sheriff Stanek does not hold inmates past their scheduled release date on ICE warrants, which have been held unconstitutional by a number of courts.  Instead, his practice seems to go one step beyond the warrant procedure in helping ICE locate and deport people.

Now Minnesota Congressional Representative Keith Ellison is asking for answers from Stanek about exactly what is asked and whether prisoners are advised of their right not to talk to ICE or given access to an attorney before being questioned by ICE agents. Specifically, Ellison wants answers by close of business on Friday, July 28 for the following questions:

  1. What access to Hennepin County sheriff’s Office (HCSO) inmate databases and other booking information does ICE receive? How regularly is this information provided, and on what grounds?
  2. Please list the questions that all detainees booked at Hennepin County jails and detention facilities are asked as part of standard intake procedures, as well as the point in the process when ICE is notified, how they are notified, and how communication with ICE is tracked.
  3. It was reported on July 7, 2017 that when HCSO deputies book inmates, they inmates for their country of birth and citizenship information. On what legal basis are your deputies soliciting this information from people booked at your facilities? What notification, if any is given to inmates about whether they are required to submit the information?
  4. The same report stated that with foreign-born inmates, HCSO deputies call ICE and sometimes put the inmate on the phone with an ICE agent or bring ICE to question them in person. What notification, if any, are detainees given that they are not required to speak with ICE either over the phone or in person?
  5. What percentage of detainees who are interviewed by ICE at your office receive legal representation during or prior to these interrogations?
  6. How and when does transfer of detainees to ICE custody happen? Please describe the chain of actions that HCSO takes to facilitate transfer of HCSO detainees to ICE custody.
  7. In 2016, how many total estimated hours did HCSO staff spend assisting ICE, or other federal immigration enforcement agencies?
  8. Hennepin County is estimated to have spent nearly $1.5 million on detaining undocumented immigrants in 2015 alone, according to the National Institute of Corrections and the Department of Justice.
    What is the estimated overall cost of HCSO staff time spent assisting ICE and other federal agencies with federal immigration enforcement for the current fiscal year?

Immigration advocates, public defenders, and a host of other critics want a change in the jail’s policies. That seems unlikely to happen. According to the Star Tribune article, even the County Board can’t tell Sheriff Stanek what to do:

Over the past year, [Public Defender] Moriarty and advocates such as John Keller at the Immigrant Law Center have asked Stanek to stop sharing information with ICE. Commissioner Greene’s office explored ways of preventing sheriff’s employees from doing so, but the County Board has no authority over Sheriff’s Office policy.