Judge Throws Out Suit Against Sheriff Over Immigration Detentions

Sheriff sued cooperating ICEAn illegal alien’s class-action lawsuit, in which he claimed a Virginia sheriff violated his constitutional rights by detaining him at the request of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), has been thrown out by a federal judge.

The law enforcement officer who was sued, Culpeper County, Virginia, Sheriff Scott Jenkins, told The Epoch Times that he’s satisfied with the legal outcome.

“I am pleased that this lawsuit seeking preferential treatment for criminal illegal aliens within our justice system has been dismissed,” Jenkins said.

“This judge confirmed what people with common sense have known all along—my actions as sheriff, in cooperating with federal law enforcement authorities on illegal immigration, are completely legal and constitutional. Those arguing otherwise are out of touch with the concerns of our entire community and country. Spending time and money helping repeated lawbreakers escape the rightful actions of law enforcement is incomprehensible.

“I appreciate the enormous outpouring of support from our community as I pushed back against these attacks. I will always stand firm on this and other constitutional issues while protecting our community,” he added.

The case itself goes back two years.

Francisco Guardado Rios was arrested Aug. 13, 2017, for two misdemeanor offenses under Virginia law: driving without a license and contributing to the delinquency of a minor.

The foreign national was placed in the custody of the local jail, which is managed by Jenkins. The same day, ICE delivered documents requesting Rios be held beyond any scheduled time of release for 48 hours, because it had determined there was probable cause to believe Rios was an alien deportable from the United States under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).

The state court ultimately convicted Rios and sentenced him to 30 days in jail, with 20 days of the sentence suspended. Because he had been jailed 10 days, the state court ordered his immediate release, with credit for time served.

But because ICE had filed continued detention paperwork, Rios was held at the jail another two days and then transferred to the custody of ICE on Nov. 9, 2017, on civil immigration charges. Rios claimed in his lawsuit that almost 100 individuals, including himself, had been held past their release dates in the preceding two years because ICE requested it.

During the time period in question, Jenkins’s jail didn’t have a formal cooperation agreement with ICE, but on April 24, 2018, the institution formally entered into one under section 287(g) of the INA.

According to ICE, the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement 287(g) program “enhances the safety and security of communities by creating partnerships with state and local law enforcement agencies to identify and remove aliens who are amenable to removal from the United States.”

Section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act “authorizes the Director of ICE to enter into agreements with state and local law enforcement agencies, that permit designated officers to perform limited immigration law enforcement functions. Agreements under section 287(g) require the local law enforcement officers to receive appropriate training and to function under the supervision of ICE officers.”

The sheriff’s office is one of only two law enforcement agenciesin Virginia to sign a 287(g) agreement with ICE. The other is the Prince William-Manassas Regional Adult Detention Center.

U.S. District Judge Glen E. Conrad of the Western District of Virginia ruled in Rios v. Jenkins that the sheriff had followed the law.

Although Rios was arrested for committing a local crime, as opposed to an immigration violation, ICE had properly directed the sheriff to detain him, Conrad found, adding that no federal court of appeals has “held that it would violate the Fourth Amendment to comply with an ICE detainer and administrative warrant.”

Attorneys for Rios had contended the county couldn’t detain him for ICE because it had no written agreement with ICE under 287(g). But the judge rejected that argument finding “local law enforcement officials may cooperate with ICE in the detention or removal of aliens not lawfully present in the United States … when such cooperation is expressly ‘[requested]’ or authorized by ICE.”

Reprinted with permission from - The Epoch Times - by Matthew Vadum

If You Enjoy Articles Like This - Subscribe to the AMAC Daily Newsletter!

Sign Up Today
Read more articles by Outside Contributor
Notify of
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Frank Doyle
1 year ago

It’s about time!

JJ Johnson-Smith
1 year ago

How is it that American “Adults” seem to have forgotten the meaning of the word, “ILLEGAL” ? This Sheriff obeyed his Oath to the Constitution and the People, and that is admirable and what we should EXPECT from ALL Law Enforcement . If ALL police agencies in this country obeyed their Oath, we would have very, very few illegal border crossers, no more corrupt politicians, no more Antifa or Black Lives Matter, no riots, and NO unconstitutional Gun Laws! So now you know who to focus on, WILL you?

Clark Kent
1 year ago

The focus needs to be upon AMERICAN CITIZENS. When the vast majority of folks don’t even bother to REGISTER to vote, much less cast a ballot, then WE are to blame! ‘We have met the enemy and he is us’ – Pogo.

Steve Hughes
1 year ago

(Fist pumps ACROSS THE LAND ! )
MEGA -Congrats, sheriff.

Clark Kent
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve Hughes

Throttle down, friend. This case will be reversed by a higher court; mark my words. The USA is WAY, WAY beyond voting and courts settling the Constitutional path forward. Prepare NOW for the soon arriving storm.

1 year ago

El Hombre you have a right to get OUT of MY country and never return. So was Rios buying alcohol for the minor? Was the minor here legally? To me the “auto” birth certificate needs to stop or at least have to note if either or both parents speak fluent English. If not “both” no certified birth certificate.

1 year ago

If you are not a citizen of this country you do not have constitutional rights

Dawn-Elaine Danforth
1 year ago

What part of the word illegal is confusing? What constitutional right could he possibly have?

Doctor Zorro
1 year ago

He and all invaders have no constitutional “rights”! He was put up to this “lawsuit” by a Marxist democrat shyster lawyer.

1 year ago

Portland, OR, Seattle, WA,LosAngeles, CA, etc. etc. Cities and States in rebellion against the USA. ergo: traitors, by definition.

T Anderson
1 year ago

When will this country follow all laws and not just pick and choose which ones they will adhere to? Illegal is illegal no matter what it is you have done.

Emily Lynne Higgins
1 year ago
Reply to  T Anderson

You would think so, unless you were a progressive or Leftist, laws are an inconvenient truth.

Pat R
1 year ago

Would be curious to learn who represented/funded representation for Rios. I bet it was ACLU.

1 year ago
Reply to  Pat R

How is it that a non-citizen can bring a lawsuit against anyone ??

Marilyn S
1 year ago
Reply to  Pat R

I would be curious as well. Perhaps George Soros has a hand in this. You & I know these illegals are getting representation at no cost, except to the taxpayer. They have the nerve to come here and complain about their accommodations, demand legal rights that they are not entitled to, social services benefits, free healthcare, etc. Whatever they get here is much better than the poor living conditions they come from. We need to crack down on this situation and enforce the laws.

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x