PORT TOWNSEND — The Board of Jefferson County Commissioners discussed a resolution that would provide legal protections to immigrants who access the courthouse.
The resolution would establish courthouse policies that would reflect the state’s Keep Washington Working Act (KWW) and its Courts Open to All Act (COTA).
The county’s resolution was drafted following the details of the office of the Attorney General’s 2020 published model policy, said Phillip Hunsucker, chief civil deputy prosecuting attorney.
The commissioners expressed support for the resolution, which is planned to be on Tuesday’s consent agenda.
“This is state law, and we are implementing a local policy that helps to provide guidance and clarity for our staff,” Commissioner Heather Dudley Nollette said.
KWW, enacted in 2019, prohibits state and local agencies, including law enforcement, from using their resources or personnel to assist in federal civil immigration enforcement. It also bars personnel from collecting or sharing a person’s immigration or citizenship status, except when required by law, and prohibits detaining or arresting people based solely on civil immigration violations.
In 2020, the legislature passed COTA — RCW 2.28.310-330 — requiring courthouses to adopt policies in lockstep with state law to guarantee that everyone can access the courts regardless of immigration status.
“The purpose of the policy is to support public safety by having courthouses be safe places that anybody can come, regardless of their immigration status,” Superior Court Judge Brandon Mack said. “We want witnesses to show up in court. We want people to show to cour who have reported crimes. We want defendants to show up to answer allegations.”
While the court is legally required to comply with federal judge-signed warrants, it is not required to comply with administrative warrants, commonly utilized by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), Hunsucker said.
Federal law supercedes state law when the two are in conflict, according to the state constitution, Hunsucker said. In the case of KWW, great pains were taken to avoid conflict between the state and federal law, he added.
“There’s no federal law that gives Immigration and Customs Enforcement the authority to make arrests wherever they want,” Mack said. “If they believe somebody is a risk to public safety, they can go get a warrant signed by a judge.”
If ICE agents do obtain federal judge-signed warrants, the courthouse’s new policy would require that it be reviewed before the agents could make arrests or obtain non-public information, Mack said.
“Even if they’ve got their mask on and they (say), ‘Ah, we’re not going to tell you what we’re doing’, then you’re not allowed in the courthouse unless you tell us what you’re doing,” Mack said. “If you’re coming to either (do) surveillance or you’re coming to civilly arrest somebody, ‘You will leave,’ is what the sheriff’s department would tell them. You’re not authorized by state law to make an arrest within a mile of the courthouse.”
The policy would extend to all offices within the courthouse, not only to the courts themselves, Hunsucker said.
County Assessor Jeff Chapman said his office regularly fields questions from the public in person, over the phone and in writing. If those questions come from someone identifying as an ICE agent, he said it would be helpful to know whether staff should respond differently.
“If we’re going to have a policy on what we should do, we really need our staff training,” he said.
District Court Judge Mindy Walker presented example warrants to those in attendance at the afternoon session.
“One is a copy of a warrant that is signed by a judge and one that’s not,” she said. “I have that copy on my bench all the time, just in case something comes up.”
In public comment, county resident Jean Ball questioned if there is more that can be done to confirm the legitimacy of warrants.
“Is there an online database that we can compare a warrant to, to be sure that it is valid and recent and not just a photocopy of something that somebody got offline?” she asked. “Because what we’re seeing is a lot of vigilantism, and we shouldn’t be blind to that.”
Commissioner Greg Brotherton asked if the county would need a stronger position to stand against policies the federal administration is pursuing.
“Is this going to do it?” he asked. “Is this what we need? Should we consider a more proactive stance aside from just enforcing Washington state law?”
“Once we start overstepping what the state law is, then we’re kind of creating our own law,” Sheriff Andy Pernsteiner said. “I think if we just enforce state law, we’re safer there.”
Hunsucker suggested the commissioners work on an aspirational resolution as a separate measure.
“This is applying some rules for what has to happen on state law,” Hunsucker said. “If there’s lawsuits related to this, there’s a good chance the (Attorney General’s) gonna defend them. The closer you get to their policy, the easier you make it for them to defend those policies.”
________
Reporter Elijah Sussman can be reached by email at elijah.sussman@peninsuladailynews.com.
