Police Powers: Federal Law Enforcement Boundaries

The ability of police officers to enforce federal law is a complex issue that varies depending on the jurisdiction and the specific circumstances. In the United States, federal law does not explicitly prohibit state and local law enforcement officers from enforcing certain federal criminal laws, such as the criminal provisions of the INA (Immigration and Nationality Act). However, the authority to enforce these laws may depend on state laws and specific federal provisions. For example, Connecticut law authorizes state and local police to arrest individuals for violations of federal criminal law, but the applicability of this authority to civil provisions of federal immigration law remains unclear. Additionally, Department police officers have the authority to enforce certain federal laws and conduct investigations within their jurisdiction, as outlined in the U.S. Code. It is important to note that while the majority of law enforcement officers uphold the law, incidents of police misconduct can occur, and federal laws exist to address such instances, protecting the rights of all individuals in the country.

Department police officers can enforce federal law on department property

Department police officers are granted certain powers to enforce federal law on department property. The Joseph Maxwell Cleland and Robert Joseph Dole Memorial Veterans Benefits and Health Care Improvement Act of 2022 outlines the enforcement and arrest authority of Department police officers. This includes the power to make arrests on department property for violations of federal law or any rules prescribed under Section 901(a).

Department police officers are also authorised to enforce traffic and motor vehicle laws of a state or local government within the jurisdiction of department property. They can issue citations for violations of such laws, as long as they are authorised to do so by an express grant of authority under applicable state or local law. Additionally, these officers can carry department-issued weapons, including firearms, while off department property but in an official capacity or during official travel.

The Act also mandates that the Secretary of Veterans Affairs must provide annual training to Department police officers on suicide prevention within the population they serve. This training must include effective behavioural science procedures for suicide prevention and crisis intervention skills, as well as information about mental health and substance abuse disorders.

It is important to note that the enforcement of federal law by state and local police officers is a complex issue. While federal law does not preclude state and local officers from enforcing the criminal provisions of the INA, the specific authority to do so may vary depending on state law and the specific circumstances. For example, in Connecticut, state and local police officers are authorised to arrest individuals for violations of federal criminal law, but the legality of an arrest for a specific federal crime depends on whether federal law explicitly or implicitly allows it.

State and local police can enforce federal criminal law

In Gonzales v. City of Peoria, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that federal law does not preclude local enforcement of the criminal provisions of the INA (722 F.2d 468, 475 (9th Cir. 1983)). The Gonzalez case examined the city's policies, which authorized its police officers to arrest illegal immigrants for violating the criminal entry provisions of the INA (8 USC § 1324). The defendants argued that federal law prohibited state and local police officers from making such arrests. The court held that local police officers may, subject to state law, constitutionally stop or detain people when there is reasonable suspicion or, in the case of arrests, probable cause that they have violated, or are violating, the criminal provisions of the INA.

In People v. Barajas, the California Court of Appeal upheld the authority of California local police officers to make arrests for violations of two provisions of the INA, 8 USC § 1325. Similarly, in a 2002 legal opinion, the Department of Justice (DOJ) took the view that state and local police were not preempted from arresting persons for any violation of federal immigration law, including immigration status violations. A few states subsequently passed measures that authorized state police to arrest certain categories of aliens who committed immigration status violations that made them removable.

However, it is important to note that the ability of state and local police to enforce federal criminal law is not absolute. In the 2012 case of Arizona v. United States, the Supreme Court held that states are generally preempted from arresting or detaining aliens based on suspected removability under federal immigration law. Such action may be taken only when there is specific federal statutory authorization or pursuant to "request, approval, or instruction" from the federal government.

State and local police can enforce civil provisions of federal immigration law

The role of state and local police in enforcing federal immigration law has been a subject of debate and has evolved over time. While federal law enforcement agencies, such as the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), have the primary authority over immigration matters, there are instances where state and local police can play a role in enforcing civil provisions of federal immigration law.

The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 added Section 287(g) to the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), authorizing ICE to delegate specific immigration officer functions to state and local law enforcement officers. This delegation allows for enhanced collaboration and partnership between federal and state authorities, with ICE providing oversight and direction. The 287(g) Program includes the Jail Enforcement Model (JEM), the Warrant Service Officer (WSO) program, and the Task Force Model (TFM), which enable state and local law enforcement to identify, process, and remove criminal aliens who are in the country illegally.

State and local police officers have the authority to make arrests within their jurisdictions for any offense, including federal crimes, when an individual is apprehended in the act or based on reasonable grounds. This authority extends to misdemeanours and felonies. However, the specific laws and policies vary across states, and some states have passed legislation mandating their law enforcement agencies to partner with ICE under the 287(g) Program.

While it was traditionally assumed that state and local officers could enforce the criminal provisions of the INA if permitted by state law, they were generally precluded from directly enforcing the civil provisions. This view has been supported by court cases, opinions of the Department of Justice (DOJ), and state attorneys general. However, following the terrorist attacks in September 2001, there was a shift towards increasing the role of local law enforcement in immigration enforcement. The Attorney General at the time, John Ashcroft, expressed the view that state and local officials have the "inherent authority" to enforce federal immigration law, including its civil provisions.

Despite this shift, the civil provisions of the INA have been considered a federal responsibility due to their complex and pervasive nature. The distinction between civil and criminal violations in the INA is important, as an alien can be illegally present in the United States without violating the criminal provisions. For example, overstaying a visitor's visa or acquiring prohibited employment would violate the civil provisions but not the criminal ones. While the DOJ previously held the view that state and local police lacked the authority to enforce civil immigration law, it recently changed its stance, concluding that they do have the inherent authority to do so.

Federal law does not preclude state and local officers from enforcing INA criminal provisions

The authority of state and local law enforcement officials to enforce federal law has been a topic of debate. While some observers argue that the federal government does not have adequate resources to enforce immigration law and that state and local law enforcement should be utilized, others question the role of state and local law enforcement agencies due to limited resources and immigration expertise.

Historically, the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) has been interpreted to limit the authority of state and local law enforcement officials to enforce immigration law to specific criminal provisions that also fall under their jurisdiction. In contrast, the enforcement of civil provisions, including the apprehension and removal of deportable aliens, has been viewed as a federal responsibility, with states playing a supporting role.

However, according to a Congressional Research Service (CRS) report to Congress, federal law does not prohibit state and local officers from enforcing the criminal provisions of the INA. This view is supported by court cases, including Gonzales v. City of Peoria, where the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that federal law does not preclude local enforcement of the INA's criminal provisions. State laws, such as in Connecticut, may also authorize state and local police to arrest individuals for violations of federal criminal law.

The Gonzales court noted that the "general rule is that local police are not precluded from enforcing federal statutes," and that federal regulation in a particular area should not be presumed to preempt state enforcement unless there are persuasive reasons or a clear indication from Congress. The court found no inherent conflict with federal interests or intent by Congress to preclude state or local enforcement of the INA's criminal provisions. As a result, local police officers may, subject to state law, stop or detain individuals with reasonable suspicion or probable cause for arrest.

Federal laws addressing police misconduct cover state, county and local officers

Federal laws addressing police misconduct cover state, county, and local officers, including those working in prisons and jails. These laws prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, colour, national origin, sex, and religion by state and local law enforcement agencies that receive financial assistance from the Department of Justice (DOJ).

The DOJ investigates and prosecutes allegations of constitutional violations by law enforcement officers, including the use of excessive force, sexual misconduct, theft, false arrest, and deliberate indifference to serious medical needs or substantial risk of harm to a person in custody. The DOJ's authority extends to all law enforcement conduct, regardless of whether an officer is on or off duty, as long as they are acting or claiming to act in their official capacity.

Federal laws that address police misconduct include both criminal and civil statutes. For example, it is a crime for one or more persons acting under the colour of law to willfully deprive or conspire to deprive another person of any right protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States. "Under colour of law" means that the person is using the power given to them by a governmental agency, and it includes situations where an officer is exceeding their rightful power.

In addition, several federal laws apply to state and local law enforcement officers, such as the prohibition of engaging in a pattern or practice of conduct that deprives persons of their rights protected by the Constitution or federal laws. This includes excessive force, discriminatory harassment, false arrests, coercive sexual conduct, and unlawful stops, searches, or arrests.

Furthermore, state and local police officers are authorized to make arrests without a previous complaint or warrant for any offence in their jurisdiction, including misdemeanours and felonies. However, the ability of state and local police officers to enforce civil provisions of federal immigration law is less clear and may depend on specific state laws and interpretations.

Frequently asked questions