While the Mankato City Council considers letting its ICE accountability ordinance expire, it should prioritize protection and justice for citizens and clarity for local law enforcement and worry less about potential federal lawsuits.
The council was briefed by the city’s lawyer on prospects of renewing the ordinance that prohibited mask wearing, required body cameras and clear identification of all officers who work in Mankato. It’s important to note that the ordinance applied to all officers, not just ICE or other federal officers. That was a provision aimed at addressing a federal court case that prohibited cities from making such laws if they did not apply to all officers.
But courts have made other recent rulings that led the city’s attorney to worry about lawsuits by the federal government. A federal judge struck down a Philadelphia law similar to the Mankato law but also required officers wear name badges and only drive marked vehicles.
In the Philadelphia case, the judge ruled the law violated the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution that calls for federal law to override state and local laws. The city, the judge said, couldn’t tell federal officers how to do their jobs.
In a Minnesota federal case, however, a judge ruled Minneapolis and St. Paul laws that restricted local officers from helping ICE enforce immigration law was constitutional because it did not apply to restricting actions of federal officers, only state and local officers.
Mankato City Attorney Pam Whitmore recommended to the council and public safety committee that the city allow the ordinance to expire when the 60-day limit is up at the end of August. She argued it carries risk of litigation by a federal government that “isn’t shy about filing lawsuits.” She also argued because the ordinance had not really been used and there had been no complaints, letting it expire would be the way to go.
Use or lack thereof of an ordinance should not be a reason for letting the accountability ordinance expire. If we used that criteria for all laws, many should be repealed.
It only takes one ICE incident to create a public safety threat, and when that happens an ordinance allowed to expire would not be helpful.
We think allowing the ordinance to expire is too risky and too fast a move.
The federal government recently sued the city of Milwaukee in another case that challenges a law that prohibits mask wearing and requires officers’ name and agency be easily identifiable on their uniforms. That case has yet to play out, but Milwaukee officials say the Supremacy Clause doesn’t apply.
Milwaukee City Attorney Evan C. Goyke pointed to a 1988 circuit court ruling that said “the Supremacy Clause was not intended to be a shield for ‘anything goes’ conduct by federal law enforcement officers.” He also pointed to another federal court ruling from 1920 that that said “An employee of the United States does not secure a general immunity from state law while acting in the course of his employment.”
The Milwaukee ordinance makes an important point about community-based law enforcement, something Mankato has embraced for some time.
“The use of facial coverings and disguises by law enforcement officers significantly affects the public’s perception of law enforcement, officer-community interactions, and accountability,” the ordinance states.
We believe the council should consider the impact the expiring ordinance would have on local officers. They would be put in a place where they may get 911 calls on someone being accosted and arrive to find it’s an unidentified ICE offer. Or not.
The Milwaukee ordinance goes further: “Persons reasonably may experience fear or intimidation when approached by officers whose faces are obscured. Such reactions can heighten defensive behavior and unnecessarily escalate the tension inherent in many interactions between law enforcement officers and members of the public.”
Goyke said in a letter in response to U.S. Department of Justice that asked for assurance the ordinance would not be enforced against federal officers, that “the City and the public have a right to know if masked, armed, and unidentified men seizing people on our streets are who they say they are.”
Lorenzo Salgado Araujo, who worked building houses in the U,S. for 35 years, was shot and killed by ICE agents in Houston who were not even looking for him. He knew how to behave if ICE agents stopped him, as he was in the process of obtaining legal status. But his son believes he was worried that the unmarked car and agents were robbers trying to steal his van and his tools.
Federal lawyers point to needing the masks and secrecy so agents are not “doxxed,’’ as they and their families may be subject to harassment online or otherwise. But the remedy for doxxing should be prosecution of perpetrators not creating secrecy for the powerful and dangerous federal law enforcement agencies.
We have not heard of many serious “doxxing” cases, but we have learned about far too many deaths of immigrants, unlawful detainers and injuries to innocent citizens and immigrants seeking their legal rights.
And in some cases, the fear of doxxing seems to fall short of reasoning, when federal law passed in 2021 calls for ICE agents working in protests to where uniforms that identify they are ICE. Even the government is recognizing the drawbacks of ICE agents always wearing masks. Recent killings have helped change ICE policy that officers can wear masks and hide their identity at “their discretion.”
The city also will be asking the public safety committee to come up with procedures for police to follow when it comes to cooperating with ICE. That’s also a good idea.
It seems prudent that Mankato continue its ordinance until the Milwaukee and other cases play out. Risk of lawsuits seems to come with the territory of any government that has a police agency. An expiring ordinance also gives ICE a free pass for the illegal tactics it has employed.
We would advise the council to carefully balance the interests of its citizens to be protected from secret arrests and safety of its own officers, against the risk of yet unspecified legal action by the federal government.