"We tried to craft something in the middle" - Georgia committee chairman on his version of HB 1105 and a surprise amendment

https://vimeo.com/showcase/gasenpubsaf

THE BASICS ON ICE WARRANTS AND ICE DETAINERS
Why ICE is Sending Immigration Warrants to Local Law Enforcement and What it Means

Q: Where does ICE’s authority to issue a detainer stem from?

A: By issuing a detainer, ICE requests that a law enforcement agency notify ICE before releasing an alien and maintain custody of the subject for a period not to exceed 48 hours, excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays, to allow ICE to assume custody. This request flows from federal regulations at 8 C.F.R. § 287.7, which arises from the Secretary’s power under the Immigration and Nationality Act § 103(a)(3), 8 U.S.C. 1103(a)(3), to issue “regulations … necessary to carry out [her] authority” under the INA, and from ICE’s general authority to detain individuals who are subject to removal or removal proceedings.

–>Required reading for Georgia legislators.

________

The below is taken from the March 14, 2024 hearing on HB 1105 in considering HB 1105. Committee members are listed here.

HB 1105 – The Georgia Criminal Alien Track and Report Act of 2024

AP report on our bill here.

Video of entire committee meeting here. *See March 14, 2024

* We note that this hearing was held three weeks after the murder of Laken Riley in Athens.

The Senate version of HB 1105 changed language that required Georgia jailers to comply with ICE detainer notices and inserted ACLU-ish anti-enforcement language that would require a judicial warrant. The below is the Chairman alluding to a mistake his office made in that replacement langauge that gutted the bill. There are other changes that watered down measure as well.

Chairman John Albers:

“Uh, I know there are some people watching online. Uh, we worked very hard on this bill for the last week and a half. Uh, we got a lot of input, very thoughtful. I will tell you, there are some people that think it’s not going to, or not gone far enough, and we got some people that think the opposite. We tried to craft something in the middle, and I for one, and I know you gentlemen do too, believe that word “compromise” is not a dirty word, it’s a good word, and we should do it more often in order to, uh, get consensus.

Uh, I think this is a very well-balanced bill. I wanna thank you for your help on that. At the appropriate time there are two amendments that are gonna be offered. One is a scrivener’s error that I will tell you all about right now, and it’s gonna be, uh, between lines 273 and 274, where it says, “An a rent- arrest warrant issued by.” That actually, from where it’s, “The United States,” to the next line, “Homeland Security,” should actually be, a federal judge, or federal magistrate judge, is that correct, Jenna?

Jenna – Legislative Counsel:

A federal magistrate.

Chair Sen. John Albers responding to a shocked gasp of “no!” from a pro-enforcement activist sitting in the front row:

“I’m sorry. That’s gonna be what’s gonna happen. So that is one area, uh, because those folks cannot take out warrants.”

Chair Sen. John Albers:

Uh, and then, uh, there will be another, uh, amendment that’s gonna be offered by Senator Bearden, and I’m gonna let him bring his amendment up after that, uh, as well. So I just want to tell everybody what’s gonna happen here. Um, we’re gonna do, uh, any final questions-…”

_____

The text of this part of the bill now reads like this:

270 – No person identified by the LESC of the United States Department

271 of Homeland Security pursuant to this subsection shall de detained unless a request to

272 detain has been received pursuant paragraph (2) of this subsection or the existence of

273 an arrest warrant issued by the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement

274 Division of the Department of Homeland Security a federal judge, or federal magistrate for each person verified.