From the Bill of Rights Defense Committee:
BORDC Model Ordinances: Your Community Can Do What the Government Won't
Warrantless surveillance. Torture. Privacy violations. Since the beginning of the so-called "war on terror," we've seen these injustices and many more. Yet, despite our vocal protests and even the promises of a new President, little has changed, and no one in the government has paid for their unconstitutional and immoral actions.
We at the Bill of Rights Defense Committee, like you, have had enough. If the federal government won't act to prevent unconstitutional violations of the rights of law-abiding Americans, or punish those responsible for violating our country's most fundamental human rights commitments, then it falls to We the People to act. That's why we have released two model ordinances that will allow communities across the U.S. to do what the federal government has not.
One model ordinance focuses on unconstitutional surveillance and privacy violations. It limits local law enforcement activities from infiltrating or spying on activist groups, protects against racial and religious profiling, restores Fourth Amendment rights compromised by intelligence collection efforts, and creates a private right of action for individuals whose rights are violated. This ordinance also blocks local law enforcement agencies from doing the work of federal immigration authorities, in order to protect their capacity to focus on public safety efforts undermined by local immigration enforcement.
A second model ordinance takes torture accountability to the local level by authorizing investigation and potential prosecution by local authorities. If any government official accused of conducting or authorizing torture enters a municipality that has passed an optional provision in this ordinance, local law enforcement officers must arrest the official and the local district attorney must investigate and seek to prosecute the official under the principle of universal jurisdiction.
Both of these ordinances will have the force of law where enacted.
If you're ready to take action in your community, these ordinances are an excellent organizing opportunity. Get started with our organizing toolkit and contact Emma Roderick, BORDC's grassroots campaign coordinator, to get advice and connect with other organizers across the country.
BORDC is building a movement across the United States to stop constitutional violations at the local level. Be part of that movement by introducing these ordinances before your city or town government. Start building your local coalition today.
From the Bill of Rights Defense Committee:
Model Legislation for Local Governments
Model Legislation for Local Governments
Ordinance to protect the focus of local law enforcement agencies on their core public safety mission by limiting their domestic surveillance and immigration enforcement activities
This model legislation offers local legislative bodies an opportunity to protect local law enforcement agencies’ ability to focus on their core public safety mission by limiting their domestic surveillance and immigration enforcement activities in cooperation with federal officials. The legislation’s sections include the following:
Limits on intelligence collection and surveillance to restore the Fourth Amendment’s
warrant requirement;
Limits on profiling according to race, religion, or country of origin;
Limits on profiling according to political speech or activity;
Limits on immigration enforcement operations;
Limits on cooperation with federal or military officials;
A provision for a civil action and damages.
Each of these sections can be removed, supplemented, or modified to suit the needs of any particular jurisdiction. If you develop a modified version of this legislation, please share it with BORDC.
Ordinance to protect the focus of local law enforcement agencies on their core public safety mission by limiting their domestic surveillance and immigration enforcement activities.
Whereas [list local law enforcement agencies] (“local law enforcement agencies”) are accountable to this municipality; responsible for its public safety while granted limited resources; and charged with a mission to serve and protect its law‐abiding residents, rather than to monitor, harass or
intimidate them; Whereas the Constitution and Bill of Rights ensure the rights of law‐abiding Americans to be free from arbitrary state scrutiny, surveillance, searches, interrogations, seizures, or arrest; Whereas public trust in law enforcement officers, and their reciprocal respect for the rule of law,are vital to promoting public safety; Whereas federal agencies responsible for collecting domestic intelligence have repeatedly and
systematically violated the law by exceeding their authorities; Whereas federal agencies responsible for collecting domestic intelligence have repeatedly and systematically violated the privacy and First Amendment rights of law‐abiding Americans and
servicemembers subjected to unjustified and unreasonable surveillance; Whereas oversight by neither the Congress nor the Article III Judiciary has achieved transparency into the expanding array of domestic spying and surveillance programs and policies pursued by federal agencies, often with support from local agencies; Whereas the ongoing secrecy surrounding domestic surveillance activities has precluded the operation of democratic checks and balances; and Whereas the experiences of localities across the United States demonstrate conclusively that allowing local law enforcement agencies to focus on their core public safety mission, without the distraction or counter‐productive pursuit of federal immigration enforcement or intelligence s, offers public safety benefits far beyond any perceived benefits, collection mandate
BE IT RESOLVED: That [the City of _____] remains firmly committed to the protection of civil rights and civil liberties for all people.
Limits on Intelligence Collection and Surveillance
Local law enforcement agencies shall not participate in intelligence collection programs involving federal or military officials, or private sector data sources. Nor shall local law enforcement agencies engage in efforts to collect or retain information about the lawful activities of individuals or groups unless directly related to criminal activity. Local law enforcement agencies will pursue, engage in, or support neither electronic nor physical surveillance activities unless supported by a warrant specific to the time, place and target of such surveillance. Intelligence collection activities unauthorized by a warrant are per se unreasonable and strictly prohibited. Local law enforcement authorities shall disseminate criminal or intelligence information only to law enforcement agencies that (a) need to know specific information in order to perform a specific law enforcement activity; (b) have a right to know that information; and (c) agree to follow procedures regarding information receipt, maintenance, security, and dissemination which include robust protections for individual privacy and independent oversight. Criminal intelligence collected by local authorities shall be disseminated only to law enforcement agencies; recipients may include neither military nor private sector actors, nor agencies (e.g., fusion centers, Joint Terrorism Task Forces) through which military or private sector actors could gain access to such data.
Requirements for Individualized Suspicion Standards
Law enforcement agents shall conduct searches of individuals in this jurisdiction only on the basis of probable cause that a criminal offense has been committed. Reasonable suspicion that an offense has been committed may justify a cursory pat down of outer clothing for weapons, but shall not justify a search, seizure, or the collection or retention of intelligence information. Suspicionless searches are per se unreasonable and may not provide a basis for arrest, prosecution or the collection or retention of data for intelligence purposes. Local law enforcement authorities shall not select individuals for surveillance, searches, or arrest based in any part on the individual’s race, ethnicity, country of origin, or religion (except where trustworthy information relevant to the locality and timeframe links an individual of a particular race, ethnicity, country of origin, or religion to a specific criminal incident or scheme). Absent reasonable suspicion of criminal activity, officers shall not demand an individual’s identification. Local law enforcement authorities may not collect, disseminate or maintain criminal intelligence information concerning an individual unless there is probable cause to believe that the individual is involved in criminal conduct or activity and the information is directly related to that criminal conduct or activity. No incident reports concerning allegedly suspicious activities shall be reported to databases accessible by federal officials unless such activities constitute a violation of a criminal statute.
Limits on Undercover Infiltration and Political Profiling
Local law enforcement authorities shall neither engage in undercover infiltration of groups or organizations pursuing First Amendment‐protected activity, nor conduct pretext interviews of individuals affiliated with such groups, without probable cause that a criminal offense has been committed. Local law enforcement authorities may not select groups for investigative scrutiny, to any extent, on the basis of their First Amendment‐protected (e.g., speech, political or religious) activities. Religious institutions and political organizations shall not be subjected to undercover or covert investigative methods absent a compelling investigative purpose pursued through narrowly tailored means subject to independent oversight. Local authorities shall not collect, disseminate or maintain criminal intelligence information about the political, religious or social views, associations, or activities of any individual or any group, association, corporation, business, partnership, or other organization unless such information directly relates to criminal conduct or activity and there is probable cause to believe that the subject of the information is or may be involved in criminal conduct or activity.
Limits on Immigration Enforcement
Local law enforcement agencies shall not participate in activities related to enforcing federal immigration laws. Local agencies shall not engage in agreements with the Department of Homeland Security pursuant to section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, nor shall they provide support for immigration enforcement activities in coordination with federal officials, nor shall local facilities be used to detain individuals held for suspected immigration violations. Local law enforcement authorities shall not stop, detain, question, interrogate, monitor or search a person solely for the purpose of determining that individual’s immigration status. When conducting a criminal investigation of a petty misdemeanor, local law enforcement authorities shall not inquire into an individual’s immigration status, nor shall they refer information about the individual to federal immigration enforcement authorities. Nor shall local authorities initiate a criminal investigation based solely on information or suspicion that an individual has committed a
civil violation by residing in the United States without proper authorization. The use of an otherwise valid criminal investigation or arrest as a pretext to ascertain information about an individual’s civil immigration status is prohibited. When proposing potential plea bargains, authorities and local prosecutors shall offer neither payment, nor reduction in charges or recommended sentence, in exchange for information about third parties who may be in the country without documentation. In order to encourage undocumented individuals to report criminal activity without fear of retribution, local authorities shall not inquire into the immigration status of victims or witnesses of crimes.
Limits on Cooperation with Federal or Military Officials
Activities undertaken by local law enforcement agencies in coordination with federal counterparts shall be strictly limited to investigating suspected criminal acts or or disaster preparedness & recovery activities. Local law enforcement agencies may participate in joint intelligence analysis activities with private sector data sources, or federal intelligence or law enforcement agencies, only to the extent their activities relate specifically to (1) law enforcement involving the investigation of suspected criminal acts committed in the past; and (2) disaster preparedness & recovery. Local agencies may interface with military or National Guard personnel only to the extent their activities relate specifically to disaster preparedness or recovery.
Provision for Civil Action and Damages
The United States, or any person injured by a violation of this Act, may file in either a State court of general jurisdiction or in a district court of the United States a civil action for declaratory or injunctive relief, and may receive the higher of liquidated damages of $1,000 per occurrence or actual damages.
Severability
The provisions of this Ordinance shall be severable. If any phrase, clause, sentence or provision of this Ordinance is declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to violate the Constitution of the United States or the Constitution of the State of [ ], or if its applicability to any agency, person or circumstance is held invalid, the validity of the remainder of the Ordinance and its applicability to any other agency, person or circumstances shall not be affected.
Distribution
The [City executive official] shall send copies of this ordinance to our U.S. Congressional and Senate representatives, the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary, the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on the Judiciary, the U.S. House of Representatives Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, the U.S. Attorney General, and the President of the United States.
GO TO: www.bordc.org to get on the Bill of Rights Defense Committee's mailing list to receive emails allowing you access articles on important civil liberties issues from a variety of sources.
|
|