PHILADELPHIA – In an answer to pertinent litigation, the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement department argues that it is not legally required to disclose civil immigration enforcement records to The American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania and Farmworker Legal Aid Clinic.
The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on May 20, seeks injunctive and other appropriate relief requiring ICE to properly respond to a Freedom of Information Act request sent by the plaintiffs, and to promptly disclose the requested records concerning immigration enforcement in the Pennsylvania, Delaware and West Virginia regions.
The FOIA request concerned all Form I-213s (“Record of Deportable/Inadmissible Alien”) prepared by any agent or employee under the supervision of the Philadelphia Field Office, including all sub-offices, between Jan. 1, 2017 and the present.
I-213s are completed by an ICE officer after arresting an individual and includes a narrative which explains why the officer decided to make the arrest and the tactics the officer used in completing the arrest.
Data compiled by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse at Syracuse University indicates that the office’s arrest numbers jumped dramatically after the inauguration of President Donald Trump, from just over 3,000 arrests in 2016 to more than 4,000 in 2017. In the first six months of 2018 alone, ICE’s Philadelphia field office arrested 2,995 people.
The suit and various media reports state ICE’s Philadelphia field office is one of the most active offices in the country and allege that its officers sometimes engage in questionable activities, including trespassing, warrantless searches and racial profiling.
“The requested records contain information of great public importance, especially in light of defendant’s aggressive enforcement actions under the current presidential administration,” the suit states.
“Increased immigration enforcement and the fear of deportation has deterred many immigrants from reporting crimes, participating in court proceedings, seeking necessary health care, attending church, or even traveling to the grocery store to purchase food. The public has a right to know about the Defendant’s local enforcement operations, including their tactics and how they conduct collateral arrests.”
On Aug. 7, 2019, the plaintiffs submitted their FOIA request to ICE via e-mail and an application for a waiver. The request was denied on Aug. 27, appealed by the plaintiffs on Sept. 17, and finally denied for the second time as “unduly burdensome” on Oct. 16, the suit says.
“ICE doesn’t get to act in secret, and they don’t get to act outside the boundaries of the law. But here, they are failing to follow the Freedom Of Information Act in order to avoid public scrutiny of their behavior. It’s time for court intervention,” said Reggie Shuford, executive director of the ACLU of Pennsylvania.
“We have documented numerous instances of ICE engaging in racial profiling and terrorizing Pennsylvania residents across the state. Communities can’t hold ICE accountable if they don’t know how they carry out their activities,” added Caitlin Barry, director of the Farmworker Legal Aid Clinic at Villanova University’s Charles Widger School of Law.
UPDATE
ICE filed an answer to the complaint on June 22, denying the ACLU’s claims as mere conclusions of law to which no official response was required and asserting four affirmative defenses.
“Defendant ICE acted in accordance with all applicable laws and regulations. The Court lacks jurisdiction over the subject matter of plaintiffs’ complaint for any relief plaintiffs seek that 5 U.S.C. Section 552 does not authorize,” according to the answer from the U.S. Attorney’s Office.
“Information that plaintiffs seek in their FOIA requests is exempt from disclosure under the FOIA, 5 U.S.C. Section 552, and plaintiffs are not entitled to compel production of records that are exempt from disclosure. Plaintiffs have not alleged sufficient factual and/or legal bases for their request for attorney’s fees. Defendant ICE reserves the right to plead and prove additional affirmative defenses as this case progresses through litigation.”
That was followed on July 15 by counsel for both parties voluntarily dismissing the second count of the complaint, which was that the defendant improperly denied or had not responded to plaintiffs’ request for a fee waiver.
For counts of violating FOIA and not responding to the plaintiff’s request for a fee waiver, the plaintiff is seeking a declaration that:
• The defendant violated FOIA by unlawfully withholding the requested records and by failing to respond to or denying the request for a fee waiver;
• Orders the defendant to immediately conduct a search of any and all responsive records to plaintiffs’ August 2019 FOIA request and demonstrate that it employed search methods reasonably likely to lead to the discovery of records responsive to plaintiffs’ FOIA requests, including production of “FOIA Search Staffing Sheets” for all searchers;
• Attorney’s fees, costs and such other relief as the Court may deem just and proper.
The plaintiff is represented by Caitlin A. Barry of Villanova Law School in Villanova, David A. Nagdeman and John J. Grogan of Langer Grogan & Diver in Philadelphia, plus Muneeba S. Talukder, Vanessa L. Stine and Witold J. Walczak of the ACLU of Pennsylvania, in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh.
The defendant is represented by Lauren DeBruicker and Gerald B. Sullivan of the U.S. Attorney’s Office through the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, in Philadelphia.
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania case 2:20-cv-02363
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com