Sussex County voters to weigh in on ICE cooperation. What happens if referendum passes?

Monsy Alvarado | NorthJersey

Show Caption Hide Caption N.J. Attorney General ends agreements with ICE N.J. Attorney General ends agreements with ICE. Law enforcement agencies cannot be deputized by ICE.

Sussex County residents will vote Tuesday on whether local law enforcement should work with federal immigration authorities, the first time the public will weigh in on a state directive limiting cooperation with the Trump administration's immigration crackdown.

If approved, county freeholders said, the non-binding referendum would give them the green light to back Sheriff Michael Strada if he is challenged in court for ignoring the Immigrant Trust Directive issued by Gov. Phil Murphy's administration. The edict, released by the state attorney general in March, limits local assistance with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

The goal, Attorney General Gurbir Grewal has said, is to build trust between the state's growing immigrant community and law enforcement. But critics say the directive makes it more likely criminals will be released before they can be turned over to immigration authorities.

"The idea is for us to show them where the people of Sussex County stand," said county Freeholder Josh Hertzberg, a former border patrol agent. "And if the state wants to come to take action against us for abiding with federal regulations at the people's will, then we will have a different fight on our hands."

Strada has said he will work with ICE when he deems it necessary, which could invite a legal challenge from the attorney general, Hertzberg said. Cape May and Ocean counties -- two other Republican-led counties -- have moved to file their own lawsuits against the state directive.

A spokesman for the AG's office said it would not comment on the possibility of a lawsuit, and that the office is confident law enforcement across the state is complying with the ICE restrictions. Any violations of the directive will be treated as internal affairs complaints within the department in question, the spokesman said.

Strada, who oversees the county jail, did not return calls this week, but is scheduled to attend a rally Saturday to support the referendum. The New Jersey Herald reported in July that Strada said he planned to honor ICE requests to detain inmates facing immigration violations until the federal agency can take hold of them.

The Immigrant Trust Directive prohibits police and corrections officers from holding someone arrested for a minor criminal offense past the time he or she would otherwise be released simply because ICE has requested it. The policy also forbids notification to ICE of an individual’s upcoming release.

The directive does allow law enforcement to notify the agency of the upcoming release of an inmate charged with violent or serious offenses, including murder, rape, arson, assault, bias crimes and domestic violence. But local officials can only detain that person until 11:59 p.m. the day they are supposed to be released.

Law enforcement, under the directive, also cannot stop, question, arrest, search or detain any individual based solely on their immigration status and they cannot participate in ICE enforcement operations.

Letting voters decide

The referendum has been months in the making. In April, the all-Republican freeholder board approved a question on the November ballot that would have asked voters whether the sheriff's office should ignore the Immigrant Trust Directive, which it stated "would undermine federal law."

But Grewal, in a letter to Sussex County officials, said that any instructions from freeholders or voters for law enforcement to ignore his directive would violate state law.

The freeholders in August approved a revised question asking whether the county, not the sheriff, should cooperate with ICE and make available "tools, resources, personnel and real, personal and intellectual property" owned by Sussex county.

In practice, that means the sheriff's office. Freeholder Dawn Fantasia said that as far as she knows there are no other tools and resources that the county owns that would be used by ICE.

"The property that we own we would then make available, '' she said. "There haven't been any conversations about how this could affect other information that the county would own, outside the sheriff's office. That was not a consideration when this question was written."

The state directive also bans New Jersey law enforcement from providing ICE access to equipment, office space, databases or other property, unless those resources are readily available to the public.

The ballot question is expected to be approved in Sussex County, where Republicans outnumber Democrats 2-1, and where more than 60 percent of voters cast ballots for President Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election.

The county is home to a small number of immigrants. Only about 7% of Sussex County's roughly 143,500 residents are foreign-born, with about 3% being non-citizens, according to 2017 estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau's American Community Survey.

Nonetheless, the ballot question has its critics. Brian Lozano, a community organizer for Wind of the Spirit, an immigration advocacy organization based in nearby Morristown, said he fears what it will mean to the everyday lives of immigrants in the county if the referendum is approved.

"It's ironic that you have people who are conservatives, who are advocates for smaller government and for the federal government not meddling with the state government, but when it comes to the politics of immigrants and immigration they do want the federal government to meddle with enforcement,'' Lozano said.

"There are pockets within Sussex county with immigrants and I know they are more fearful than usual, and I fear for what that ballot question is going to bring about in the social fabric of Sussex County," he added.

David Laguna Cruz, 26, who lived undocumented for five years before he received legal status in February and who will start a job next week around Lake Hopatcong, said if the question is passed it will scare immigrants without legal status.

"This is such a bad thing,'' said Laguna Cruz, who lives in Warren County. Immigrants "will not understand because the state is saying one message and if they live in Sussex County, they will hear another."

Sussex isn't the only county pushing back on the Immigrant Trust Directive. Ocean and Cape May County Sheriff's have already filed suit challenging the directive, while Monmouth has begun to take steps to do so as well. Warren County passed a resolution in August supporting Ocean County's lawsuit.

"I just think that the voters have a right to voice their opinion, and I really believe the governor should make it a statewide referendum and then you will have the entire state voting on it,'' said Sussex County Freeholder Director Herb Yardley.

If the referendum is approved it will also allow county officials to consider joining the suits which have already been filed, Fantasia said.

Monsy Alvarado is the immigration reporter for NorthJersey.com. To get unlimited access to the latest news about one of the hottest issues in our state and country, please subscribe or activate your digital account today.

Email: alvarado@northjersey.com Twitter: @monsyalvarado

NJ Election Day 2019:What you need to know before you vote

Voting: NJ elections: Get informed. Get involved. Vote. Subscribe to NorthJersey.com

Health: Hepatitis A cases surge in New Jersey with 6 dead, more than 500 infected