Guide to the 287(g) Program in the U.S.

Section 287(g) relates to the U.S. Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). It is authorized by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). 

What is it? This article will explain how it works and other related information on the 287(g) program.

What Is the 287(g) Program?

The 287(g) program is about the safety and security of communities. It is a collaboration between the federal government and local and state law officials to enforce federal immigration law. It helps in identifying and removing aliens from the U.S. for good. 

The 287(g) program is supervised under the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). 

How Does the 287(g) Program Work?

The 287(g) program works with the agreement between the director of ICE with state and law enforcement officials. Together, they allow selected state and local officials to receive training in performing limited immigration enforcement functions. 

After receiving training, these officers are required to work under the supervision of ICE officers. ICE provides such selected officers with the authority to identify and detain immigration offenders they find breaking state or local law.  

These selected officers are authorized to (or have the right to):

• Interview immigrants to ascertain their immigration status
• Use DHS databases to find information on individuals
• Keep detainees in their hold until ICE takes custody 
• Enter data into ICE’s databases and in a case management system
• Issue a Notice to Appear to any detained individual (this is the first official charging document in a removal process)
• Recommend detention and immigration bond
• Recommend voluntary departure of a detained individual in place of the formal removal proceeding
• Transfer nonresidents to ICE custody

The 287(g) program requires participating officers to go through a complete background investigation. They should possess U.S. citizenship and should understand law enforcement activities. 

287(g) Program Agreements

There are four types of agreements in the 287(g) program that participating officers can enter into with the DHS. These are:

Jail Enforcement Model

The JEM covers all detainees arrested by state or local law enforcement agencies against pending criminal charges. This program is supervised by the local ICE office of the Enforcement and Removal Operations field. 

Under this model, the authorized local law enforcement officers have the power to interview or interrogate such noncitizens who are arrested on state or local charges. The designated officers are required to function according to the SOP of the Memorandum of Understanding. 

Warrant Service Officer Model

The warrant service officer model provides powers to only specially selected officers to issue ICE administrative warrants. It is a narrower cooperative agreement than the JEM model, allowing local enforcement officers to interrogate detained noncitizens. 

Under the WSO model, only nominated law enforcement officers are trained, certified, and authorized to perform limited immigration officer functions. They are allowed to work within the law enforcement agency jail and/or other correctional facilities. 

Task Force Model

This is a much broader model than the above two. The task force model allows authorized officers to identify and detain alleged noncitizens. They even have the right to arrest and interview them if they think they have violated federal immigration laws. 

Hybrid Model

As the name suggests, the hybrid model combines the different models and works on a much broader approach. 

However, currently, only the first two models are used or employed in the field, i.e., the jail enforcement and warrant service officer models. 

Over the past few years, due to increasing dissatisfaction, the task force and the hybrid models were discontinued. 

Problems With the 287(g) Program

The 287(g) program has always been under review due to multiple problems associated with it. Here are some of these problems:

Varying Functioning of Different Local Jurisdictions

• According to a comprehensive analysis by the Migration Policy Institute (MPI), the 287(g) program targeted more individuals with minor misdemeanors and traffic offenses than serious criminal offenders.
• MPI also identified that some jurisdictions targeted serious criminal offenders while other jurisdictions followed a “universal” model. The universal model is designed to target unauthorized immigrants irrespective of their criminal history. 
• As a result of this, more than 33% of detainees were arrested for minor reasons like traffic violations. This led to far more arrests than the 287(g) program’s detention capacity, leading to the improper allocation of resources. 

Racial Profiling

• According to a Department of Justice investigation, Latino drivers were about nine times more likely to be interrogated for offenses than non-Latino drivers in the area of Maricopa County.
• Another investigation concluded that Latino drivers were nine times more likely to be arrested for traffic violations, whereas non-Latino drivers just received citations for the same offense. 

Too Expensive for Some Localities

• In Harris County, Texas, the 287(g) program was terminated due to a lack of resources. The sheriff preferred to utilize this immense amount of money on programs like improving clearance rates of major crimes, etc. 
• In Prince William County, Virginia, the sheriff had to raise property taxes and take money from rainy day funds to fund the 287(g) program. 
• The operating expenses for the 287(g) program in North Carolina in the first year were reported to be around $5.3 million. 

Insufficient Direction, Supervision, and Guidance By ICE

• According to a March 2010 report, the agreement between ICE and the local law enforcement officers didn’t follow the 287(g) program norms properly. Also, the training and deputation of the selected authorized officials were not up to standards; the program was also poorly supervised by ICE. 
• A report in January 2009 stated ICE failed to articulate the objectives of the 287(g) program properly. It also highlighted ICE’s inconsistency in communicating the proper use of the program to its local partners.
• According to the DHS OIG, ICE also failed to properly plan out the approval of the 287(g) program participants. 

287g Agreements Threaten Community Safety 

• On interviewing the law enforcement officers of Maricopa County, it was found that the 287(g) program tainted the relationship between law enforcement officers and the Latino community. 
• The International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) once stated that the local police agencies depend on immigrants’ cooperation in maintaining law and order. The program could discourage immigrants from sharing critical information even when heinous crimes are committed. 
• The Major Cities Chiefs Association (MCCA) also stated that the hard-won trust of immigrants would be lost, and they would fail to cooperate with the police if minor violations resulted in purely civil immigration enforcement action.

In their words, “without assurances that contact with the police would not result in purely civil immigration enforcement action, the hard-won trust, communication and cooperation from the immigrant community would disappear.”

Conclusion

The 287(g) program purportedly focuses on maintaining better law and order within the country. Still, many are opposed to the program as it targets immigrants and has harmed the relationship of law enforcement officers with the immigrant community.

Frank Gogol

I’m a firm believer that information is the key to financial freedom. On the Stilt Blog, I write about the complex topics — like finance, immigration, and technology — to help immigrants make the most of their lives in the U.S. Our content and brand have been featured in Forbes, TechCrunch, VentureBeat, and more.

See author's posts