By Richard Hernandez
In the recently intensified tension between the Donald Trump Administration and advocates of the undocumented immigrant community and the Democratic Party-dominated political establishment in Sacramento that backs them, San Bernardino County law enforcement this week doubled down on its decision to side with the later.
That decision comes roughly two-and-a-half months after the Republican-affiliated political and law enforcement leadership in San Bernardino County made an abrupt and unexpected left turn, undercut the U.S. Justice Department, the Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, all follow-on agencies to the former Immigration and Naturalization Service, the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency, the FBI and the U.S. Marshals Office in its plans to initiate the Trump Administration’s Operation Alta California in San Bernardino and Riverside counties in April. Instead of federal officials going forth with Operation Alta California as had been planned, they held off for nearly two months and began the roundups of illegal aliens in earnest on June 2, doing so not in the more conservative, Republican-dominated areas of the state but rather in the Democratic stronghold and heartland of the influx of unregistered migrants into California, Los Angeles. According to Immigration and Customs Enforcement, it and other federal agents arrested 4,635 individuals suspected of being in the United States illegally or under false pretenses in the 48 hour period of Tuesday and Wednesday, June 3 and 4. The lion’s share of this activity took place in Los Angeles County, indeed, within the City of Los Angeles. ICE [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] was only marginally active in San Bernardino County.
There were immediate reactions to the stepped-up immigration law enforcement, most notably in those areas where Operation Alta California was conspicuously taking place, in the form of widespread protests. Those protests manifested spontaneously, or so it seemed, at the locations where the ICE raids were taking place, the garment district and other industrial warehouses near downtown Los Angeles in the initial phase of operation Alta California, as well as around federal buildings and facilities. It would later be discovered that the protestors were using a sophisticated monitoring and communications network in an effort to check the federal authorities.
The Los Angeles Police Department and the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department found themselves particularly challenged, as both the city’s and the county’s political leadership did not want any perception that the machinery of local government was aiding the federal enforcement effort. The protests included some aggressive tactics, including efforts to physically interfere with federal agents during the conducting of the raids. Some of the demonstrations in Los Angeles devolved into near riot conditions, with cars being overturned and set afire. More alarming to the Trump Administration, which could not rely on local or state law enforcement agencies for assistance in maintaining security and the safety of its personnel, protestors were staking out the hotels where the agents detailed to Los Angeles to execute Operation Alta California were staying.
The Trump administration federalized the California National Guard, bypassing the governor in doing so, and brought the state’s military into Los Angeles to “maintain the peace.” When Governor Gavin Newsom and California Attorney General Rob Bonta went to court to challenge the federal government’s commandeering of the National Guard, the Trump Administration rolled with that punch and escalated further, calling upon the U.S. Northern Command, under the leadership of U.S. Army Major General Scott Sherman, to repopulate Task Force 51, a U.S. Army-directed contingency command post with 719 Marines from the 2nd Battalion, 7th Marines stationed at the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center Twentynine Palms in order to replace the roughly 1,700 personnel from the California National Guard that were in Los Angeles if the legal challenge succeeded.
The U.S. Northern Command, through task forces such as Task Force 51, has off-the-shelf plans and capability to coordinate with civil authorities when possible and to simulate civil authority when the circumstances do not permit it, to utilize resources from the Department of Defense to assist in maintaining public order during crisis situations.
The State of California, Governor Newsom and California Attorney General Rob Bonta in particular, maintain that the use of the National Guard and the Army/Marines by the Trump Administration to maintain civil control in order to carry out Operation Alta California, are improper uses of the military, as they are violations of the Posse Comitatus Act , 18 U.S.C. § 1385, which was signed into law in 1878 by President Rutherford Hayes, limiting the powers of the federal government in the use of the military to enforce domestic policies within the United States.
The term posse comitatus refers to the authority under which a county sheriff or another civilian law enforcement authority can conscript able-bodied individuals to assist in keeping the peace
Major General Sherman maintains Task Force 51 is operating under legal authority, specifically Title 10 of the United States Code.
“Task Force 51 forces have been trained in de-escalation, crowd control and standard rules for the use of force,” Sherman said.
In this general atmosphere, law enforcement agencies throughout Southern California sought to stand clear of what was happening, doing nothing to obstruct the federal agencies but doing nothing to assist them either. On occasion, however, ICE or Homeland Security agents, particularly while doing reconnoitering for action then in the planning stages, would utilized undercover vehicles equipped with high power radio communication equipment, vehicles which are similar in appearance or even identical to undercover vehicles used by the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department and other law enforcement agencies. This resulted in confusion and, at times, a conflation of local law enforcement personnel with federal agents.
Word was spreading in San Bernardino County, most particularly among Latinos and the undocumented population, that the sheriff’s department and some other police departments were working with ICE and the Department of Homeland Security. This was somewhat galling to Sheriff Dicus, whose decision in late March to have his department stand down and not cooperate with the Trump Administration in launching Operation Alta California in San Bernardino County came at a certain price that included losing the respect of a good portion of the Republican establishment that constitutes his political base in San Bernardino County. Dicus’s calculation in March was that his decision not to have his department participate in the roundup of illegal aliens would cost him some support among those who were rabid Donald Trump supporters or extreme right wingers, but that he would more than make up for that with appreciation from those in favor of a laissez-faire immigration policy. But with the rumors flying to the effect that his department was hip deep in the execution of Operation Alta California, Dicus found himself the inheritor of the worst of both worlds: Republicans saw him as a traitor for abandoning Donald Trump just as the commander-in-chief was getting down to brass tacks and making good on his promise to engage in wholesale deportations of unregistered aliens. Simultaneously, and San Bernardino County’s Hispanic community, which comprises 52 percent of the population, was under the impression that he was allowing his department to act in lockstep with the Department of Homeland Security and Immigration and Customs Enforcement in rooting out the county’s illegal aliens, some 69 percent of whom are Latino.
Some San Bernardino County residents were giving his deputies a hard time about what they perceived. When ICE and Homeland Security agents checked into hotels on the east side of the Los Angeles County Line in San Bernardino County to get away from the protestors, there were confrontations in the hotel parking lots. When San Bernardino County deputies responded to the uproar, threats were made by some in the crowd who made the point that the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department was a “racist organization.”
While acknowledging that personnel from federal agencies across the board have taken up temporary residency in local hotels and motels, the sheriff’s department maintains that not all of those agents are with ICE.
In many cases, according to the department, the federal agents staying in local hotels or motels “are not involved in immigration enforcement” and subjecting them to “no sleep” protests in which rotating groups of protestors use lighting – including lasers – shined into the windows of suspected ICE and Homeland Security agents and maintain sound levels that in some cases could be disturbing the peace by exceeding nighttime ambient noise levels, could be considered beyond the pale.
“These individuals are not ICE agents and are not involved in any immigration enforcement activities,” the department said. “Not only are they disturbing agents who have no involvement with ICE, but they are disturbing uninvolved paying guests.”
The department called upon the protestors to “be respectful of all guests and personnel in our community.”
Sheriff Dicus said those who want to make clear their opposition to the Trump Administration’s immigration policy will be free to do so within San Bernardino County, but that such protests must remain within the bounds of nonviolent expression.
“The San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department supports the right to peacefully protest,” Dicus said. “However, we will not tolerate lawlessness and violence in this county. Anyone who violates the law, attacks law enforcement, or vandalizes property will be arrested, incarcerated and prosecuted.”
Yesterday, June 19, the Fontana Police Department’s public information officer, Sergeant Nathan Weiske, sent the Sentinel a message that originated with Fontana Police Department Police Chief Michael Dorsey.
Dorsey wrote that he had been alerted by a Fontana resident to recent social media posts which could lead to “unnecessary strife. These posts are riddled with misinformation,” which said had “already been the source of conflict” between some Fontana residents and “several” police officers.
“ It is not clear if the misinformation is deliberate or simple misunderstandings about our city and our officers,” Dorsey said. “On several occasions, members of the Fontana Police Department have been misidentified as ICE and/or federal law enforcement officers engaged in immigration enforcement. These misunderstandings have led to activity from uninvolved individuals that disrupt active police operations.”
Stating he wanted to clear up any misconceptions, Dorsey said, “The Fontana Police Department is committed to protecting and serving all members of our community. Our mission is to ensure the safety and well-being of everyone who lives, works, or visits our city. California law, including the California Values Act (SB 54), guides how local law enforcement agencies interact with federal immigration authorities. These laws are designed to build trust between law enforcement and immigrant communities, and we fully support this purpose. We believe that no one should fear contacting the police to report a crime, seek help, or cooperate in an investigation because of their immigration status.”
Stating the department’s mission is “to respond to emergencies, investigate crimes, and maintain public safety, Dorsey said, “If someone reports a crime, or if a person is interviewed as part of an ongoing operation or investigation, we do not ask individuals about their immigration status. That information is not relevant to Fontana Police Department operations. Public safety is strongest when all residents feel safe and respected. Trust is essential to effective policing”
Dorsey called upon the public to “allow officers to carry out their duties without interference. It is not safe for our officers, or for others involved in any active police operations if misrepresentations or misunderstandings lead to inappropriate engagement.”