NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Attorney General Pam Bondi received a response this week from the governor of the first state to pass “sanctuary” legislation, after she had warned it was engaged in “policies and procedures that hinder federal immigration enforcement to the detriment of the interests of the United States.”
Oregon Gov. Tina Kotek, a Democrat, confirmed receipt of Bondi’s original letter from the prior week, writing back that she “respectfully disagree[s]” with Bondi’s assertion.
“The State of Oregon, its public officials, and its law enforcement officers do not engage in conduct that thwarts federal immigration enforcement,” Kotek said, noting the Beaver State passed America’s first sanctuary state law in 1987.
State Rep. Rocky Barilla, D-Eugene, introduced the bill which was then signed by Gov. Neil Goldschmidt amid concerns police were wrongly profiling Latinos about their immigration status.
BOSTON’S WU FIRES BACK AT BONDI, CITING REVOLUTION, AS OTHER CITIES SLAM FEDS OVER ‘SANCTUARY’ WARNINGS
In her response to Bondi, Kotek said in the nearly 40 years since, Oregon officials and law enforcement have not violated federal immigration law while abiding by the state policy.
“A 2018 ballot measure to repeal portions of Oregon’s federal immigration enforcement law failed when 63% of Oregon voters opposed repealing the existing law,” she said, adding that the 1987 law was revisited and “strengthened” by Salem lawmakers in 2021.
Kotek cited Oregon Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum’s statement after the 2021 actions:
“Oregon stands for the safety, dignity, and human rights of all Oregonians,” the state prosecutor said at the time, as Kotek also echoed the contention the state is acting within the law due to legal precedent from contemporary Tenth Amendment called the Anticommandeering Rule.
That rule, borne out of cases like New York v. U.S. in 1992 – which focused on requests for states to dispose of nuclear waste — prescribes that the federal government cannot force them to administer federal programs.
TRUMP ADMIN SLAMS ACLU FOR COMPARING ICE CENTER TO JAPANESE INTERNMENT CAMP: DERANGED AND LAZY
Kotek said in her letter to Bondi that she is aware of warnings that the Trump administration may pursue civil actions against public officials on grounds they are obstructing federal immigration efforts or facilitating lawbreaking.
“The state does not take on the additional expense or burden to perform federal immigration enforcement as it is the job of the federal government,” Kotek went on, citing the Anticommandeering Rule.
“The state of Oregon is in compliance with federal law and will continue to follow state law. Therefore, no ‘immediate initiatives’ are necessary to eliminate laws that impede immigration enforcement,” she concluded, noting that her letter was delivered to the Justice Department via Federal Express.
The back and forth comes as an Oregon federal judge is poised to decide on a notable immigration case in the state, and rule on whether a twice-deported Guatemalan asylum-seeking farmworker can be released from federal custody despite prior deportations.
Identified only as L.J.P.L., the foreign national had been deported during the Obama administration, and litigants argued whether he could be released so long as he makes regular check-ins at a Eugene immigration office.
Judge Karin Immergut, a Trump appointee whom Chief Justice John Roberts also named to the FISA Court, will decide whether ICE can move forward and immediately deport “L.J.P.L.,” according to Oregon Public Broadcasting.
Read the full article here
