By Jim Glennon

In my lifetime, and the 45 years of being in and around the law enforcement profession, I’ve never seen politics impact the general duties of cops as I’ve witnessed over the past 5-6 years.

When police officers are sworn in at the very beginning of their careers, the main point of those oaths is that the officers swear that they understand they are legally, morally and duty bound to adhere to laws, ordinances, and both their state and the United States Constitution.

Sounds pretty straight forward, doesn’t it?

Attend to local ordinances, enforce state laws, and most importantly, protect and adhere to the principles of our Constitution and the rights of individuals included therein.

Simple?

The Immigration Conundrum

Federal Law addresses illegal immigration and the need for nonfederal officers and local, county and state governments to assist when necessary. Specifically, 8 U.S. Code § 1373— Communication between government agencies and the Immigration and Naturalization Service.

“(a)In general, notwithstanding any other provision of Federal, State, or local law, a Federal, State, or local government entity or official may not prohibit, or in any way restrict, any government entity or official from sending to, or receiving from, the Immigration and Naturalization Service information regarding the citizenship or immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of any individual.”

That federal statute seems pretty clear and succinct, doesn’t it? I mean it specifically says that State and local government entities, as well as any official of those entities “may not prohibit, or in any way restrict, any government entity or official from sending to, or receiving from, the Immigration and Naturalization Service information regarding the citizenship or immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of any individual.”

Yet, several states, cities and counties have enacted their own statutes that specifically prohibit officers from complying with the above federal law.

According to several news outlets, over 300,000 detainers were issued over the past four years, but hundreds of jurisdictions across the country refused to honor thousands of those detainers when individuals with detainer orders were arrested and housed in city and county jails.

President Trump and his selection for “Border Czar”, Tom Homan, have made it clear, that deportation of criminal illegal aliens will be at the top of the priority list, “On day one!”

My honest question is this: Are police officers in sanctuary cities and states subject to arrest if they violate 8 U.S. Code § 1373? And if they do contact ICE in these sanctuary states, will they be subject to arrest on a local level?

Another question, more from a moral perspective: If an officer is aware that an illegal alien with a detainer order, who is an obviously dangerous violent criminal, and knows that failure to notify ICE will result in that criminal being released from custody by local officials, should that officer notify ICE?

Up until now, under the Biden administration, these weren’t really issues. But the change in policy, that is certainly coming under the second Trump administration; well, this may create a conundrum for line-level officers, both legally and morally.

Immigration organizations, activists, lawyers and even federal courts offer very different opinions on the above questions. But it seems like the police are going to be in the middle of this highly partisan debate.

Are our police leaders, who in many cases are at odds with their own states and political classes, ready for battle? Are they ready to prepare and protect their cops?

We’ll see.

Free Speech at Public Hearings

Last August, during a City Council meeting in Surprise, AZ, Rebekah Massie stood at the podium, during the time for public comment, and criticized how much money the city attorney was making.

Mayor Skip Hall interrupted Ms. Massie saying, “I’m going to stop you here.” He then proceeded to read rules established, presumably by the board, that prohibited criticism and complaints against any city employee.

Massie responded by saying that such a rule violated her Constitutional rights.

Hall advised that she was wrong and asked, “Do you want to be escorted out?”

You can watch the exchange here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_ZQasQJcQ0

As I watched the video of this event my first thoughts were, “Who is going to be tasked with ‘escorting’ her out and for what reason? What law was she breaking? What probable cause existed for an arrest?”

Then what caught my attention was what next came out of the mayor’s mouth: “Chief (of police), could you have someone come down here and escort Ms. Massie out of this chamber?”

Within seconds a police officer walked up behind Massie and put his hand on her back. She advised him not to touch her. It’s hard to tell if the officer gave her any type of commands, orders or warnings. He then grabbed the woman’s arm and she immediately started to resist physically by stiffening her arm.

The last thing you see on video is the officer forcing the woman up and out of the dais.

Outside, Massie was handcuffed and walked to the police station. There is body camera footage of that portion of the arrest process.

According to news reports the woman was charged with Criminal Trespass.

During the booking process, Massie, who was very uncooperative, argued with one officer about the First Amendment. His retort to her was, “There are also limitations to the First Amendment. It’s not carte blanche, you can’t do whatever you want. Despite what you might think or what your law degree tells you, that is not the case.”

Well, he’s right, there are limits to free speech. However, those limits are themselves, very limited. But is criticizing an employee at a public meeting one of those limitations that should result in a custodial arrest?

I don’t think so. And I think that is fairly obvious.

In this Surprise, AZ case it appears the Police Chief was present. I can’t see any statutory violation that would require a physical arrest no matter what the mayor thinks.

How about the Chief just asking the mayor to call a recess and then have a private conversation where he explains the Constitution to him?

In your jurisdiction, does the mayor or a city council member have a right to give an order to a police officer that they have to obey? I doubt it.

But, if placed in such a position, what would you do?

My point here is not to disparage the Surprise officer. It is to highlight something that has become an issue in these contentious times over the past several years.

Police all over this country are being put in positions where they may have to make some very serious Constitutional decisions, and quite frankly it’s not fair to them individually.

Many different types of public board meetings over the last few years have resulted in orders to individual police officers by public officials to remove citizens simply for saying things those public officials find uncomfortable or just plain don’t like.

I was a Commander for 15 years. Twice I was in a position where a public official tried to order me or one of my officers to enforce their will rather than an established law. In both cases I simply told them, “No.”

In this Surprise, AZ case, the criminal court judge dismissed the charges with prejudice, meaning Massie can’t re-face the charges at a later date.

In addition, the judge called the city’s actions “objectively outrageous.”

Massie is now suing the city, the mayor, and the police officer.

Conclusion

True leaders will prepare for such instances.

Chiefs and Sheriffs need to clearly establish the dictates of the law to board members, many of whom lack a true understanding of what establishes a statutory or Constitutional violation. They also need to outline the limitations of authority these board members have—and don’t have—over sworn law enforcement officers.

There should also be a clear understanding among the rank and file when it comes to the morals of certain policies. Officers all over the country recognize partisan and political rules, regs and legislative statutes being implemented for all the wrong reasons.

True leaders will protect their officers before they are put in positions that I’ve addressed in this column.

WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS? We want to know!

E-mail us at: [email protected]

______________________________________________________________________________________________

FREE WEBINAR! Register now for “Reimagining FTO Programs: Why It’s Crucial NOW and What Needs to Be Done” featuring Dan Greene, Executive Director for the National Association of Field Training Officers, and Calibre Press’s Jim Glennon who will discuss steps every agency can take to greatly enhance the effectiveness of your FTO programs. Thanks to the support of our sponsoring partner, Vector Solutions, this is a complimentary program scheduled for Jan. 15, 10AM – Noon central.

Note: All registrants will receive a recording of the presentation for later viewing as well.

CLICK HERE for full details and to register.