{"id":4739,"date":"2013-10-01T17:11:58","date_gmt":"2013-10-01T21:11:58","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/live-immigrationreform.pantheonsite.io\/?p=4739"},"modified":"2018-12-28T15:35:54","modified_gmt":"2018-12-28T20:35:54","slug":"ice-says-murder-of-mother-in-california-by-illegal-alien-could-have-been-prevented","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/2013\/10\/01\/ice-says-murder-of-mother-in-california-by-illegal-alien-could-have-been-prevented\/","title":{"rendered":"ICE Says Murder of Mother in California by Illegal Alien Could Have Been Prevented"},"content":{"rendered":"

On September 7, 2013, Martha Casillas, a 39-year-old mother of three, was brutally stabbed to death<\/a> in her San Jose home while her children watched television in the next room.\u00a0The police identified the alleged killer as Mario Chavez, the victim\u2019s domestic partner and father of Casillas\u2019 children. Chavez is an illegal alien according to police and relatives.<\/p>\n

A month prior to Casillas\u2019 murder, Chavez allegedly threatened his six-year-old son with a knife and was arrested on suspicion of criminal threats and domestic violence. He was later released from the Santa Clara County jail on a $2,000 bond<\/a>.
\n<\/i><\/a><\/p>\n

United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials state that Casillas\u2019 murder was preventable and blame Santa Clara County\u2019s sanctuary policy<\/a> for Chavez\u2019s release. Santa Clara County, along with a handful of other localities which seek to impede federal enforcement of immigration law, ignores ICE detainer requests unless the detainee has been convicted<\/i> of a serious or violent felony. (Santa Clara County Anti-Detainer Policy)<\/p>\n

An ICE detainer request asks jails to hold certain inmates for no more than an additional 48 hours to allow ICE agents time to make arrangements for the transfer of the alien into federal custody for the purpose of arresting and removing the alien. Santa Clara County\u2019s policy also prevents local law enforcement from notifying ICE of the detainee\u2019s incarceration status or release date.<\/p>\n

In this case, Chavez did not have a criminal record, other than a DUI conviction, so law enforcement officials could not cooperate with an ICE detainer request, nor notify ICE that Chavez had been released on bond<\/a>.<\/p>\n

In the week following Casillas\u2019 murder, the California State Legislature passed a bill that would require a similar sanctuary policy state-wide. Assembly Bill 4<\/a>,\u00a0the so-called \u201cTrust Act,\u201d generally bans local law enforcement officials from detaining any person on the basis of an ICE hold after that individual becomes eligible for release, except in a limited number of circumstances. Even then, AB 4 gives state and local law enforcement officials the option of releasing the most dangerous criminal aliens back onto the streets.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Sanctuary policies like AB 4 prioritize the interests of criminal aliens and undermine public safety. In 2012, former ICE Director John Morton stated his opposition to anti-detainer legislation. In a letter to FAIR<\/a>, Morton warned that jurisdictions that ignore ICE detainer requests undermine public safety in their communities, noting that his agency has documented serious crimes committed by deportable aliens who have been released rather than handed over to ICE.<\/p>\n

Similarly, former ICE Director Julie Myers Wood reportedly said<\/a> regarding AB 4, \u201cIt makes no sense and is unconstitutional. The federal government has sole authority to enforce immigration law. In this instance California is telling the feds what you can and cannot do.\u201d<\/p>\n

The California State Sheriffs Association<\/a>\u00a0also opposes AB 4 and similar sanctuary policies. During an interview with PRI Public Radio International on September 10<\/a>, CSSA spokesman Aaron Maquire said, \u201cYou get a request from a federal law enforcement agency, and to say that you should basically willfully disobey, or not cooperate, or thwart that request from law enforcement puts local law enforcement in a difficult position.”<\/p>\n

Likewise, the California District Attorneys Association<\/a>, Los Angeles County District Attorney\u2019s Office<\/a>, and California Taxpayers for Improving Public Safety oppose AB 4. Representatives of the California District Attorneys Association said, \u201c[W]e fear this bill would frustrate local cooperation with federal officials who maintain exclusive province over the enforcement of immigration law. It appears that this bill would permit a local policy to trump federal law, and it is not clear how such a provision would pass constitutional muster.\u201d (See <\/i>Opposition Statement<\/a>, Senate\u2019s Bill Analysis of AB 4)<\/b><\/p>\n

AB 4 was sent to Governor Brown<\/a> on September 18. He can sign it, veto it, or let the 30 day time period for action run out, in which case the bill becomes law. The Governor has until October 13 to act.