While the country had our eyes glued to Postville, Iowa, smaller raids are occuring everyday in the US. In an interview with Aaron Hutson, Program Director of the Kentucky Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights, FIRM learned that worksite and home raids took place at the end of April in the State of Kentucky.
Huston said that in late April, a Kentucky State vehicle enforcement unit stopped a driver and obtained information about the driver’s workplace during the arrest. Afterward, the same unit went to his workplace and arrested 9 other undocumented migrants, with no warrants or just cause. This led to a much larger investigation and over 50 people were arrested.
Hutson noted that the vehicle enforcement unit was going into homes and workplaces without warrants.
He said that over 12 people have been marked for deportation and at least 6 children have been left without families or caretakers. These children may become wards of the state.
Like in Postville, there is a change in tactics, from charging immigrants with state level deportation orders, to federal charges that come with jail time.
Hutson said that after the silent raids, he and fellow migrant’s rights advocates were able to organize over 100 people for a meeting. They held an impromptu “know your rights” class and talked about due process and legal representation. He highlighted the need for an infrastructure of immigration attorneys who would be available for rapid response to future raids.
Click here to listen to the entire interview.
3 responses so far ↓
Interested // June 3, 2008 at 10:09 pm
Gee…let’s not mention that the Kentucky Vehicle Enforcement Officer (not Kentucky State vehicle enforcement unit) stopped the ILLEGAL ALIEN for violating a traffic law. Was given identification information that was STOLEN from an actual US taxpayer. Followed up on this information, like us law abiding citizens expect them to, and arrested MORE people using STOLEN identities. But we shouldn’t mention the actual FACTS should we? Gets in the way of our cause.
rachelfirm // June 4, 2008 at 10:52 am
In response to your comment, first let me make a distinction between identity theft (the stealing of another’s information in order to drain their bank account, open credit cards etc.) and using an ID number in order to work (usually in inhumane conditions) and provide a living for oneself and one’s family. If there were a pathway to citizenship or if our federal government had enacted immigration reform policies to deal with these issues, immigrants could work and use their own documents without problems. When given the opportunity to purchase the documents needed, undocumented immigrants do so willingly and gladly — even when they fall victim themselves to scam artists.
Second, let me also highlight that once you begin to disregard due process for one set of people, you run the risk of disregarding it for all. We all know (and appreciate) the need for a warrant to search a house, the need for just cause to arrest a person and the right to legal representation that should be afforded to everyone. Once you take that away because of “suspicions” (which can likely translate into racial profiling of all latinos or people of color), it can be taken away from everybody.
Not to mention the allocation of funding that is going towards enforcement of this type. Are there not crimes happening that are real threats to public safety? Violence? Rapes? Drugs? Shouldn’t those be the enforcement focus of tax payers’ dollars?
Or should the State of Kentucky take on 6 children as wards of the state because their parents were arrested without due process of the law? Is that the wisest use of the State’s money and resources?
Before you decided what the FACTS are, make sure that you are looking at this from both sides.
Interested // June 4, 2008 at 9:09 pm
If they used the other person’s identity information to gain employment (for personal monetary gain) then this IS identity theft. Plain and simple. What did those people whose identities were stolen have to say about the matter? Were they actually okay with it? If the use of someone else’s identity information is not an issue with you then why don’t you go ahead and post your full name, date of birth, and social security number in your next reply so that myself or others can use it if needed. I’ll promise not to drain your bank account. Let me be straight with you. I have no problem whatsoever with those who desire to come to this country to work hard and make a better life for them and their family. But if we as citizens cannot choose which laws to obey or disobey then neither can they, regardless of the reasons they did it.
As for the next part of your argument, please explain what proof you have that the officers in question were operating outside of their legal authority as peace officers in the Commonwealth of Kentucky. All of your remarks so far provide no real evidence that due process and civil rights were violated. I am very interested in what you have to say about this since I am familiar with this incident.
In regards to your comment on the funding issue, let’s not generalize what I am talking about here. I am specifically commenting on this incident only. The agency in question is NOT in the business of rounding up illegal aliens. The officers in question were following up on information they developed while doing their normal duties. In addition to this incident their duties include the apprehension of violent criminals and taking very large quantities drugs off the streets on a daily basis. These officers do not have the luxury to pick and choose what they run into every day. They do however have to enforce laws they see being violated.
Reference the children, I believe that they are the most unfortunate victims of this situation. But who are you kidding here? Neither the officers or the Commonwealth of Ky forced their parents to violate a law. Let’s lay the blame for that problem where it belongs.
Your very last line was the most enjoyable of all. Where did I post anything that wasn’t a fact? And how can I DECIDE what a fact is? Do you mean to say that it was my opinion?
I am more than able and willing to look at things from both side of an issue. My response to your article was pointing out information that YOU conveniently left out. You article was obviously carefully worded to extract the maximum sympathy for your cause. I merely corrected your ignorance regarding the actual name of the police agency in question and filled in some of the pertinent information you so casually disregarded.
I look forward to your response.