Monroe County sheriff seeks dismissal of Indiana AG action on immigration policy, calls lawsuit ‘baseless’
This past Wednesday (Sept. 4), Monroe County sheriff Ruben Marté filed a motion to dismiss a lawsuit that was brought by Indiana attorney general Todd Rokita, over the sheriff’s policy for dealing with immigration status.
The policy applies to “immigration and/or citizenship status of suspects, offenders, witness(es), victims, or other parties contacting the Department.”
It was in July when Rokita filed the lawsuit in the Monroe County circuit court.
Rokita contends that the sheriff’s police violates a state law, which says that a governmental agency like the sheriff’s office cannot implement a policy that “prohibits or in any way restricts” an employee from taking specific actions related to ”information of the citizenship or immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of an individual.”
The specific actions include: communicating or cooperating with federal officials; sending to or receiving information from the United States Department of Homeland Security; maintaining information; and exchanging information with another federal, state, or local government entity.
Marté’s motion to dismiss calls Rokita’s complaint “baseless.” The motion to dismiss contends that the sheriff’s policy “fully complies” with the state law—in part because the policy includes the verbatim text of the state law, when it comes to prohibiting an employee from taking specific actions.
Marté’s motion to dismiss also says that the sheriff’s policy does not restrict the federal enforcement of federal immigration law.
Rokita’s formal legal complaint appears to be broader than the two points that were specifically highlighted in communication between the sheriff and the attorney general in the months leading up to Rokita’s lawsuit. In the sheriff’s Aug. 1, 2023 policy, the two points at issue read like this:
3. MCSO employees shall not detain individual(s) solely on the basis of an ICE detainer.
4. MCSO employees shall not hold an individual(s) beyond their scheduled release date based on an ICE detainer.
In a draft policy, which was eventually promulgated by the sheriff on June 29, those points were confined to apply just to “non-criminal/administrative” ICE detainers:
2. MCSO employees shall not detain individual(s) solely based on a non-criminal/administrative ICE detainer.
3. MCSO employees shall not hold an individual(s) beyond their scheduled release date based on a non-criminal/administrative ICE detainer.
Rokita’s critique of the draft version includes following suggested edit:
[Delete 2 and 3 above and replace with following] Upon receipt of a completed and executed Immigration Detainer-Notice of Action (Form I-247), under 8 CFR 287.7, officers shall detain any individual in custody and shall comply with 8 CFR 287.7 and any other applicable state or federal law relating to immigration detainers while a detainee is in their custody.
The sheriff’s motion to dismiss relies in part on the precedent in a 2021 case [City of Gary v. Nicholson], where the court of appeals found that “federal law does not permit detentions by state and local officers based solely on civil immigration detainers or administrative warrants.”
The day before the motion to dismiss was made with the court, Joseph Mead filed an appearance as legal counsel on behalf of the sheriff. Mead is special litigation counsel from the Georgetown University Law Center’s Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection. The Monroe County staff attorney who is handling the case is Justin Roddye.
First assigned to Monroe County circuit court judge Kara Krothe, the case has been transferred to special judge Erik Allen out of Greene County. For residents who want to follow developments in the case through the state’s court management system, the case number is 53C06-2407-PL-001733.
