Would the ‘Secure Communities’ law enforcement strategy profile illegal immigrants unnecessarily?

Dear Editor,
I have recently read an article in the local Guyana Times newspaper that despite strong opposition from the governors of two major U.S. cities and immigrant groups, the U.S. government may extend a controversial fingerprinting programme that identifies Caribbean and other illegal immigrants.
The U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement said the programme, ‘Secure Communities’, would be activated “in all remaining jurisdictions”. It was argued that the programme has proven to be the single most valuable tool in allowing the agency to eliminate the ad hoc approach of the past and focus on criminal aliens and repeat immigration law violators.
However, last June, Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick refused to sign an agreement to expand the strategy beyond a pilot programme in the Boston area since 2006. At the same time, New York’s Governor Andrew Cuomo, said he wanted to suspend the programme, which had already been initiated in a number of areas in his state.
Editor, what does this mean for Guyanese and other West Indian illegal immigrants? Will they be targeted unnecessarily? Some persons are of the view that ‘Secure Communities’ is an overly wide dragnet that seeks to deport a significant number of illegal Caribbean and other immigrants with no criminal record. According to another news report, just recently in a letter sent to United States Attorney General Eric Holder, the son of Barbadian immigrants, New York public advocate Bill de Blasio urged the U.S. federal government to halt the expansion of the programme to New York City, warning of the risks it poses to public safety.
I gather that the Secure Communities programme takes fingerprints of suspects in U.S. jails and sends them to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), which, in turn, shares the information with the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Some believe that this programme could result in the deportation of thousands of people accused, but never convicted of committing a crime.
Yours sincerely,
R Vanooten

Related posts