Laserfiche WebLink
AB 937 <br /> Page 6 <br />with immigration authorities in the following circumstances: <br /> <br />a) Provide a person’s release date or personal information, as specified, if such information <br />is available to the public; <br /> <br />b) Respond to notification and transfer requests when the individual had been convicted of <br />specified crimes which reflected a higher public safety danger and are on the serious end <br />of the criminal spectrum. Specifically, those crimes included serious and violent <br />felonies, as well as offenses requiring an individual to register as a sex offender; <br /> <br />c) Make inquiries into information necessary to certify an individual for a visa for a victim <br />of domestic violence and human trafficking; <br /> <br />d) Respond to a request from immigration authorities for information ab out a person’s <br />criminal history; <br /> <br />e) Participate with a joint law enforcement task force, as long as the primary purpose of the <br />task force is not immigration enforcement; or, <br /> <br />f) Give immigration authorities access to interview an individual in agency custody as long <br />as the interview access complied with the require ments of the TRUTH Act. <br /> <br />This bill would eliminate those exceptions for law enforcement to the extent that such <br />exceptions would constitute assistance in immigration enforcement, in any manner. <br /> <br />The prohibitions in this bill on assisting immigration enforcement in any manner are broader <br />in scope than the prohibitions described in the Values Act. The scope of this bill is also <br />broader than the Values Act because the prohibition on assistance applies to all state and <br />local agencies, as opposed to being directed toward law enforcement agencies. <br /> <br />This bill would prohibit any state of local agency, including law enforcement agencies, from <br />engaging in conduct which assists, in any manner, the arrest, detention, interrogation, or <br />deportation of an individual for immigration purposes. To the extent those broader <br />prohibitions might create a conflict with the Values Act, it is not clear which language would <br />control. <br /> <br />3) Reenactment Clause of the California Constitution: <br /> <br />“A section of a statute may not be amended unless the section is re-enacted as amended.” <br />California Const., Art. IV, § 9. <br /> <br />Under this provision of the State Constitution, the Legislature is required to reenact a code <br />section when passing legislation which amends that particular code section. This is intended <br />to ensure that legislators understand the scope and effect of the bill they are voting on. In <br />reviewing the contents of a bill that amends a code section, this rule allows that the bill <br />reader to easily identify amendments to existing law beca use the bill will set forth the <br />changes within the context of the current statute(s). One purpose of this constitutional <br />provision “is to make sure legislators are not operating in the blind when they amend <br />legislation, and to make sure the public can bec ome apprised of changes in the law.” The