Here’s the latest development in the ongoing argument between the lower courts and the Department of Homeland Security. Madeline Buckley reports at the Chicago Tribune:
In the wake of pressure from officials as well as legal and advocacy groups, Chief Judge Timothy Evans has enacted a general order prohibiting warrantless warrantless arrests by immigration agents in or around county courthouses.
Earlier this month, Cook County Public Defender Sharone Mitchell Jr. and a coalition of legal groups and social service organizations
petitioned the chief judge to take steps to prevent immigration arrests around the courthouses.The presence of agents around court buildings — including the domestic violencee-focused courthouse — has been a cause for alarm for lawyers and community community members who feared that people would increasingly not be able to access justice and due process in Cook County.
Court facilities have historically been spared when it comes to immigration enforcement in order to create conditions in which defendants and witnesses are likely to show up for appearances.
I think it will be very interesting to see how this order fares as it works its way through the justice system. It raises a host of interesting questions including whether a lower court judge has the authority to require judicial warrants in cases in which none are required by the written statute.
Law enforcement likes to use courthouses for arrests because they can get a positive ID via the court proceedings and be confident that the person is unarmed. There are also limited avenues for flight which pose risks to the greater public, but some people think chases are great sport and reflect a spirit of fair play sadly missing in this day and age.
The fact that the rule only applies to administrative warrants should give lie to the last paragraph in the quote; it doesn’t prohibit all arrests just of those the judges want to protect. This discrimination was not found sufficient by a federal court judge in the U.S. government challenge to the state’s sanctuary laws, so I’m not sure this judicial policy would be invalid. I don’t know if it’s enforceable as a practical matter if an agent is sent into the courtroom to identify the target and walks outside to point him out to waiting agents. Would any courthouse official intervene to prevent the arrest?