In January, I wrote about Democrats in the United States Senate proposing a group of changes in US immigration enforcement. Listing some of the suggested changes, I summed them up as largely the adopting of restraints at the US government level “that have generally helped ensure at the state and local level that police violate people’s rights less frequently and can be more likely held to account in instances when they do.”
These proposed changes included barring US immigration cops from wearing masks or participating in roving patrols, while requiring them to carry proper identification and expand their use of judge-issued warrants for searches and seizures. This is all just part of basic rules for cops in a place where liberty is a priority.
Since then, Democrats in the Congress have used the lack of similar restraints for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) as a reason to exercise the legislative branch’s constitutional “power of the purse” by refusing to fund DHS.
The Trump administration has resisted agreeing to much of the proposed changes. It did, though, in a Tuesday letter on White House stationary to Senators Susan Collins (R-ME) and Katie Britt (R-AL) offer five changes that overlap some with the Democrats’ proposed changes. The letter suggests a willingness, under pressure at least, to take steps toward ensuring greater respect for individual rights. Still, it falls short of meeting the Democrats’ demands, much less of supporting the extent of changes that should be implemented to prevent abusive behavior.
In a Wednesday Reason article, Joe Lancaster discussed the insufficiency of the five “concessions” the Trump administration offered in response to the demand for changes in how DHS cops operate. Consider, for example, that Lancaster points out that one of the changes the Trump administration offers is to not deport US citizens — something it even admits in the letter to the senators that it has no authority to do anyways. You can read the details in Lancaster’s article here.