The Department of Justice sued Colorado and the city of Denver over their sanctuary laws.
The DOJ claims the laws violate the Supremacy clause in three ways: preemption, unlawful discrimination against the federal government, and unlawful regulation of the federal government.
The defendants include Gov. Jared Polis, Denver Mayor Mike Johnston, Attorney General Phil Weiser, and Sheriff Elias Diggins.
The lawsuit, filed in the Colorado District Court, accused the state and city of having laws structured “by intent and design [to] interfere with and discriminate against the Federal Government’s enforcement of federal immigration law.”
“Foremost, federal immigration law expressly preempts state and local laws that restrict sharing information ‘regarding the citizenship or immigration status, lawful or unlawful, or any individual,’ 8 U.S.C. § 1373(a), which broadly encompasses, among other things, ‘the presence, whereabouts, or activities’ of aliens with the Federal Government. H.R. Rep. No. 725, 104th Cong., 2d. Sess. 383 (1996),” wrote the DOJ.
Colorado became ground zero over illegal immigration last summer after a video showed Tren de Aragua (TdA) members taking over an apartment complex in Aurora, CO.
Officials tried to dismiss the videos until the Aurora police confessed they had arrested TdA members.
The DOJ cited three Colorado state laws:
Then there are two Denver laws:
“These provisions are an obstacle to the Federal Government’s enforcement of the immigration laws and discriminate against federal immigration enforcement, as well as (with respect to the information-sharing and maintenance restrictions) expressly violate 8 U.S.C. § 1373,” stated the DOJ. “In rejecting congressionally authorized means of enforcing federal immigration law, including detainers and administrative warrants, these provisions constitute unlawful direct regulation of the Federal Government.”
The DOJ reminded the court that the laws cited hinder the federal government to interview those in state custody despite the Immigration and Nationality Act saying the people “shall be inspected by immigration officers.”
The agency also said the laws violate federal law by prohibiting state and local law enforcement from sharing personal information with the feds.
“Federal agents are required to detain illegal aliens who have committed certain offenses upon their release from state custody,” noted the DOJ. “Congress not only recently reaffirmed its commitment to this mandate, but also augmented the authority of federal agents in this space by adding predicate offenses that trigger this detention requirement.”
The DOJ lashed out over the Denver ordinance, which impedes the federal government from enforcing federal immigration laws, mentioning how the ICE immigration detention facility in Aurora is the only facility ICE can use to detain individuals in the state.
“Colorado House Bill 19-1124, Senate Bill 21-131, and House Bill 23-1100 impede the Federal Government’s ability to regulate immigration and take enforcement actions against illegal aliens by preventing state law enforcement officials from assisting with federal civil immigration enforcement,” argued the DOJ. “Under these laws, state officers are explicitly prohibited from complying with immigration detainers or civil immigration warrants; they are also prevented from sharing critical immigration information, and from entering into or renewing agreements to detain noncitizens for federal civil immigration violations.”
Johnston told 9NEWS: “Denver will not be bullied or blackmailed, least of all by an administration that has little regard for the law and even less for the truth. Denver follows all laws local, state, and federal and stands ready to defend its values.”
A spokesperson from Weiser’s office said: “Colorado is not a sanctuary state. The State of Colorado works with local, state and federal law enforcement regularly and we value our partnerships with local, county and federal law enforcement agencies to make Colorado safer. If the courts say that any Colorado law is not valid then we will follow the ruling. We are not going to comment on the merits of the lawsuit.”
CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY