Arrow-right Camera
The Spokesman-Review Newspaper
Spokane, Washington  Est. May 19, 1883

‘Daunting’: Uncertainty in Spokane as Trump threatens local officials who don’t aid deportations, but state law is clear for schools, hospitals and police

U.S. President Donald Trump shows off an executive order he signed.  (K.C. Alfred/dpa/K.C. Alfred)

Shadowed by Washington’s sanctuary laws, Spokane faces uncertainty on potential conflicts with President Donald Trump’s threats this week to prosecute those who impede his immigration arrest and deportation efforts.

“The question comes, is there a legal basis for the feds to order local law enforcement to enforce federal law? It’s not clear there is,” longtime Spokane civil rights attorney Jeffry Finer said.

While the future is unclear, most local agencies and officials will not change their day-to-day operations.

Trump signed a flurry of executive orders on the first day of his presidency, many of which targeted immigration policies brought about by the Biden-Harris Administration. Some of the orders aimed to end automatic birthright citizenship and asylum to migrants.

Among the actions to thwart immigration in the U.S., the Trump Administration sent out a memo to the Justice Department late Tuesday instructing U.S attorneys to investigate officials who resist and obstruct immigration-related demands, according to reporting by the Washington Post.

The memo marked the beginning of a “Sanctuary Cities Enforcement Working Group,” which intends to take legal action against states that conflict with the presidential administration’s goals to crack down on immigration policy.

His administration also announced Tuesday it would be rolling back a 2011 policy that bans federal immigration enforcement agencies from making arrests in and near churches, schools, hospitals and other safe havens.

Washington is largely considered a sanctuary state because of the 2019 Keep Washington Working Act, which decided an individual’s immigration status is not a matter of police or school resource officer action.

The law states someone cannot be detained or questioned based on their citizenship, and that officials can only give federal agents information on the person’s citizenship status if it’s directly related to a criminal offense.

“There are rights reserved to the states. If they want to delegate it to the feds, the president cannot wade into those areas. It would require heavy legislation,” Finer said.

Deputy Director of Northwest Immigrant Rights Project Vanessa Gutierrez maintains the Keep Washington Working Act is “still very much good law” and doesn’t contradict with federal law. She said the state isn’t entirely immune from getting a knock at the door from federal law enforcement.

“If federal immigration officers show up to those sensitive locations that used to be off limits by their own policies, those places can still deny them entry unless they have a judicial warrant,” Gutierrez said. “… We’re working really hard to make sure that people understand their rights and understand those differences between when we have to cooperate with federal officers and when we’re protected by law not to have to do that.”

Former Spokane City Council President Ben Stuckart said he doesn’t believe Spokane should have the liability of Trump’s immigration threats. Stuckart served in that position in 2017, which was also the last time Trump threatened to withhold federal funds from sanctuary states and cities in his prior mass-deportation effort.

“The whole state of Washington is saying, ‘Don’t cooperate with immigration enforcement,’ ” Stuckart said. “If the Trump administration says, ‘We’re going after Spokane,’ Spokane can just say, ‘We’re following state law.’ ”

In all, the efforts are “deeply disappointing,” according to Manzanita House immigration attorney Samuel Smith.

“It can prevent people from seeking out medical care when they need medical care,” Smith said. “It can prevent people from attending church or having their children go to school.

“It harms those individuals, the families, but it also harms our society and our community as a whole to make those spaces be threatened. It really does nothing but serve to scare our community members.”

Spokane law enforcement likely won’t act

The Spokane Police Department does not enforce federal laws in compliance with the Keep Washington Working Act, according to an email from department spokesperson Dan Strassenberg, meaning police will not be conducting or enforcing any type of immigration raid.

“We want community members to feel safe and trust that if they need to call 911 for any matter, their immigration status will not be asked or inquired about,” the email said. “We respect the rights and dignity of all individuals, reinforcing our commitment to equitable law enforcement for everyone in Spokane.”

Spokane County Sheriff John Nowels said he won’t impede with federal agents carrying out duties they are instructed to, but even if the building blocks were put in place for deputies to help federal law enforcement address immigration, “I don’t have the staff to do that.”

Nowels said he believes most people have a similar belief that if someone is not a citizen in the U.S. but is committing crimes, it should be addressed, “but so much gets lost” in the rhetoric around the issue. As far as the threat to prosecute local officials who impede Trump’s efforts, “that’s for the attorneys to decide,” Nowels said.

If agents came to the sheriff and directed him to violate the Constitution in tandem with the administration’s immigration crackdown goals, “I will step up and say something,” he said. And if anyone directed him to violate Washington law, he wouldn’t do that, either, because “(the federal agents) don’t have the authority to do that.”

“We have an obligation to stand up and do something if that happens,” Nowels added. “But people have to determine where that violation is.”

What he prefers to see is a widespread effort to enhance “the American dream,” and to do it without costing people thousands of dollars. Nowels would also support and help any undocumented person become a citizen if they had a goal to become a deputy, he said.

“I want to see from my elected … What can we do to come up with a plan for people who want to take part in the American dream? What about the people who came in on the boatload into Ellis Island?” Nowels said. “The Biden administration should’ve been doing more to open up a pipeline to enter here legally, and Trump needs to do the same.”

Rob Curry, a spokesperson for the U.S. Attorney’s Office of Eastern Washington, declined to comment.

Hospitals, schools don’t waver

On Friday, Spokane Public Schools sent out a staff newsletter addressing the new potential immigration policies nationwide. The newsletter stated the school district strives to give every student an opportunity no matter their background or life experience.

Under school-wide policy, staff is prohibited from granting access to federal immigration agents or providing them information unless given permission from the superintendent or attorneys in accordance with case law.

“… Spokane Public Schools is committed to upholding our policies and procedures that our schools be a safe place where our students can learn,” School Board President Nikki Otero Lockwood said in a statement. “If incidents occur, we respond immediately and work to keep all our students safe regardless of their background, circumstances, or identities.”

District spokesperson Ryan Lancaster said the district expects to hear from the Washington Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction soon for more information on the matter, and the agency will be releasing more guidance on how to support students, families and staff regarding their legal status.

While Trump’s order also rescinded immigration raid safeguards on “protected” places like hospitals, Providence Sacred Heart Medical Center spokesperson Beth Hegde said enforcement agents do not have access to patient care areas and cannot “conduct enforcement activity on our campuses.” The hospital also does not report patients’ personal information or citizenship status to authorities.

“At Providence, we see health care as a fundamental human right not a privilege. We serve members of our communities without regard to legal or socioeconomic status and believe that everyone deserves quality health care. As a mission driven organization, we have a special focus on those who are most vulnerable and know that immigrants, undocumented or not, face unique challenges,” Hegde’s statement said. “Our medical facilities are a sanctuary for all in need of healing and a safe place where everyone can expect to be treated with compassion and respect. We will continue to follow state and federal laws.”

It’s possible Trump’s enforcement endeavors could be placed on hold over an unlikely political decision from the White House, like a change of heart, or an injunction issued by a judge if he faces more lawsuits. Multiple lawsuits across at least 23 states, including by Washington Attorney General Nick Brown, have been filed this week against the president for his attempts to end birthright citizenship.

MultiCare Health System spokesperson Kevin Maloney said in a statement the immigration orders are “a developing situation” that is being reviewed.

“MultiCare will continue to support our mission of partnering for healing and a healthy future,” the statement said.

Luis Cortes, immigration attorney at Novo Legal LLC, said that even though this policy has been rescinded and allows DHS officials or ICE officers to enter these sensitive areas, whether at churches or schools, they still need to “do it the legal way.”

“For example, a church is still private, not public property. If they’re going to want to go into the churches, they’re going to need a warrant, and a warrant issued by a judge, not a warrant issued by another administrative official,” Cortes said. “This goes for businesses, hospitals and schools as well. If they’re going to want to go into a school, they’re going to need a warrant to enter these areas that are not public areas, and so in a place like Washington that still has the sanctuary protections, then they still need to comply with these legal mechanisms in order for them to enter nonpublic areas.”

Shock and awe?

Finer calls Trump’s moves a negotiation tactic to further his goal. He feels Trump knows he might be unsuccessful in some ways, maybe more successful in others, but also acknowledges these sorts of state and federal fights have happened before.

During the desegregation of the ’60s, the Supreme Court found Congress could regulate state activities if it impacted interstate commerce, Finer pointed out. But at the same time, the 10th Amendment also reserves all powers not delegated to the government for the states, he added, calling the immigration goals “daunting.”

“But I’m not betting on anything yet,” Finer said.

Mike Faulk, communications director for Attorney General Brown, said the office’s current focus is the executive order ending birthright citizenship.

With that, the office is taking a closer look at all the other immigration orders and their impact on the people of Washington. When the office heard of the threat to prosecute states that could impede Trump’s immigration goals, Faulk said it sounds more like a target on Democratic states.

“I’m not aware of any Washington state laws that violate federal law in this area,” he said. “… Our position is Washington State’s laws don’t violate federal law. We’re going to have to see what they do, (and) learn more about their arguments.”

Former Councilman Stuckart, who called Trump’s actions in 2017 “all bark and no bite,” believes that this time around, he may have more ammunition behind him to make good on his immigration threats.

“I think they’re more knowledgeable about the federal government this time around,” Stuckart said. “That’s my worry.”

Stuckart added that he believed the Trump administration’s flurry of executive orders and actions was designed to overwhelm people and states, preventing people from reacting to each individual decision.

“They’re shock and awe-ing us,” Stuckart said. “On the immigration front, luckily, we have state laws that will be defended by our new attorney general, Nick Brown.”

Spokane City Council President Betsy Wilkerson said she is confident with Brown at the helm of the attorney general’s office and former Attorney General Bob Ferguson as the state’s new governor that Spokane will effectively be able to support its immigrant population. She’s been pushing for more resources available for people who may encounter a federal immigration agent, Wilkerson said.

Councilwoman Lili Navarrete also said she will be introducing a resolution early next month reaffirming the city’s support for the Keep Washington Working Act in response to immigration concerns.

Trump’s challenge to states like Washington is not a first, however. There is a history of sanctuary cities being challenged, but courts have repeatedly upheld their protections, Manzanita House attorney Smith said. While the memo from the Justice Department makes threats against sanctuary local law enforcement for interfering with federal agents, sanctuary protections typically mean states and cities will just opt out of “helping” federal immigration enforcement, not impeding them.

“Any federal actions trying to force local jurisdictions to enforce, compelling state enforcement of federal programs, would likely be unconstitutional. And so the Supreme Court has said that immigration is purely the sole duty of the federal government,” Smith said.

Smith believes that the impact from this threat is unlikely to be borne out in the court, but simply is a scare tactic that causes some nonprofits or governments to stop helping undocumented immigrants.

Mujeres in Action, a Spokane nonprofit organization that supports survivors of domestic violence and sexual assault, wrote in a joint statement Wednesday that it strongly opposes targeting sanctuary spaces and the general rhetoric around the administration’s perception of undocumented immigrants because it makes it more difficult for abuse survivors.

“These attacks are fueled by xenophobia. As advocates for survivors and a Latine-focused organization, we believe removing protections for sanctuary spaces is both cruel and unjust,” the statement reads. “Sanctuary spaces like schools, places of worship, and medical facilities should be safe havens, not places of fear. Targeting vulnerable individuals in these spaces is inhumane.

… Insisting on a ‘right’ way to pursue the American dream is unjust, especially when many Americans’ ancestors arrived here without ‘proper’ documentation.”

For now, the legal limbo persists.

“This is uncharted territory,” Finer said. “And it’s terribly confusing.”