This shift by local agencies stems from two reasons: Some departments cite the legality of upholding such a request. California for example, has a law that limits immigration detainers. As a result law enforcement departments have reduced their compliance with such requests. In Oregon a court ruled that it was violation of a woman’s constitutional rights to be held in custody without probable cause. The Riverside County Chief Deputy cites this court ruling as a reason they do not hold people. Explaining that if they did hold people the department could be held liable in civil court. Another reason is a memo distributed by ICE explaining that immigration holds were “requests not requirements” according to the LA Times.

The second reason comes from departments trying to keep a good relationship with the communities they serve. Some officers explain that deportation threats scare people from reporting crimes. This makes communities unsafe and creates a break down between police and residents.

The outcome of this decision is being watched closely by those who are concerned with the treatment of illegal immigrants as well as other groups who are generally concerned with the treatment of Latinos by authorities in the United States. The fear these groups have is that individuals will be singled out by police for being Latino- something clearly unconstitutional. In addition, the argument is being made that it makes little sense for local and federal authorities to have overlapping jurisdiction.

In April, Arizona passed one of the nation’s toughest illegal immigration bills, SB 1070—a bill which President Obama strongly criticized. The law, whose aim it is to identify, prosecute and deport illegal immigrants, sparked uproar not only in Arizona, but in California as well.

In Orange County, eight people chained themselves together outside the federal building in Santa Ana while protesting the law. The protestors gathered to call on Santa Ana to declare itself a “sanctuary city.” A recent UC Berkeley graduate who lives in Santa Ana was quoted saying, “Undocumented people are human beings, we’re not criminals.” Protestors view laws such as this as racist, as it gives police broad power to detain anyone suspected of being in the country illegally. Such suspicion would most likely be directed towards Hispanics and is being deemed racial profiling by many.

President Obama has said that the Arizona law has threatened to “undermine basic notions of fairness that we cherish as Americans, as well as the trust between police and our communities that is so crucial to keeping us safe.”

The Santa Ana protestors were ultimately arrested and taken to city jail, but later cited and released. See Penal Code Sections 415(1), (2) (Disturbing the Peace) and 602 (Trespass).

At a council meeting on March 9, 2010, Orange County Sheriff Sandra Hutchens offered a proposal to house 838 U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detainees at two of the Orange County jails – Theo Lacy and James A. Musick Facility. Most of the ICE detainees are former federal, state or local inmates who were unable to provide proof of citizenship at the time of their arrest and were turned over to ICE after serving their sentence.

Sheriff Hutchens’ proposal was not well-received by both the Mayor and Councilmen. Both were “uncomfortable” with the Sheriff Department’s proposal especially since there was an issue of it violating the city’s 15-year-old agreement with the county, which specifies jail perimeters and limits on inmate population. According to the Orange County Register, Hutchens said “she did not believe the proposal would violate the existing agreement with the city because nothing new would be added to the jail.” She further stated, “We have no intention of increasing the population above what was discussed (in the agreement).”