Icing out ICE: Spokane outlaws warrantless immigration enforcement at events on public property

Immigration officers must have a warrant to enter a permitted event on most public property in Spokane if organizers request protection and go through the proper steps to receive it, the city council voted Monday.

The law, which went through months of delays to satisfy the concerns of enough council members to pass, did not come soon enough this summer to save Tacos and Tequila, an annual event celebrating Spokane’s Latino community that would have typically taken place last weekend on a closed city street downtown but was canceled for fear of targeted raids by immigration officials.

“We just don’t feel like it’s safe right now to hold a Latino festival because we are being targeted right now,” said Fernanda Mazcot, executive director of Nuestras Raices Community Center, when the event was canceled in July.

But bill sponsor Councilman Paul Dillon and supporters hope the new law will provide some level of reassurance for future event planners and their attendees.

“Words cannot fully describe the way your blood freezes or the way your entire nervous system becomes an active live wire when you think you may have to be the person who stands against injustice and holds federal agents accountable,” said Nicole Ruiz, an organizer for Nuestras Raíces Community Center – a nonprofit serving the Latino community in Eastern Washington that hosts events like Tacos and Tequila.

“However, there is also something powerful when you know you are backed by the law,” Ruiz added. “Despite the fear, you stand a little straighter.”

The “Safe and Welcome in Spokane” law, originally proposed to impact public events in city parks, now potentially includes any event on public property outside of parks, following the independent city park board’s refusal to take responsibility for enforcement or administration. To qualify, organizers must coordinate with the city permitting office, clearly define the borders of the event with signage or barriers and give attendees “express permission” to enter, such as with a ticket or verbal permission.

The original version of the law was proposed in May as one of the last major legislative actions by former Councilwoman Lili Navarrete, who resigned in late June citing health concerns, but the proposal faltered amid concerns from the park board.

Dillon took up the effort in June shortly after mass protests over immigration arrests, modifying the law so that it no longer included city parks. The ordinance again faced headwinds after Council President Betsy Wilkerson worried it would prevent typical law enforcement from entering if a crime occurred at a protected event.

Though Dillon has insisted the law only impacts immigration officers, the law approved Monday also explicitly allows local, county and state law enforcement to enforce laws relevant to their jurisdictions.

The ordinance was approved Monday 5-2, with Councilmen Jonathan Bingle and Michael Cathcart voting in opposition. Since May, Cathcart has argued the ordinance was more performance than protection, believing that federal law enforcement would not be discouraged from entering an event in violation of the municipal law, and they may actively surveil the perimeter of events that sought such protections.

Police Chief Kevin Hall, asked Monday what officers would do in response to a 911 call about immigration officers violating the city’s law, was clear: observe, attempt to keep the peace, and otherwise do nothing.

“SPD cannot and will not interfere with a federal law enforcement officer,” Hall said.

Instead, the law would potentially give residents the ability to sue the federal government and other parties for violations, similar to a 2018 city law that prohibited warrantless immigration searches at the downtown Greyhound station.

In 2021, Greyhound agreed to a $2.2 million settlement with Washington state for frequently allowing warrantless immigration services just before the first court hearing for a lawsuit brought by then-Attorney General Bob Ferguson. This lawsuit was based on violations of anti-discrimination and other state-level laws, not the 2018 city law, however.

Cathcart disputed that cities had the power to grant residents a right to sue the federal government over alleged violations, which would leave the ordinance toothless.

Other opponents of the law argued that the city should be supportive of federal immigration officials and the White House’s deportation initiative.

“The law is clear that invaders need to be repelled,” said Larry Andrews, owner of HVAC company Andrews Mechanical and a frequent critic of the council. “And the problem with our city right now is we’re in a deficit … and by doing what you’re doing, you’re going to make it even worse, because the (federal) administration is following the laws, and they’re going to pull all of your funding for sure.”