[Date]
Dear [Legislator's Name],
I am very concerned about immigrants’ rights, and I am following the progress of the newly introduced Memorandum on a Section 287(g) Agreement in our County Legislature. I strongly believe this legislation is impactful to the rights of our communities and neighbors in Saint Lawrence County. As a concerned citizen, I believe the people of Saint Lawrence County deserve to know and understand the legislation our representatives are passing. I am asking you, my legislator, to postpone the vote on the Memorandum of 287(g) Agreement until the public has a chance to review and comment on it, as is our public duty and right.

The proposal of this agreement

287(g) Agreements Mean More Deportations.
This explicit agreement with ICE adds the lens of immigration to jailing and policing practices, making it that much harder to get a county to stop holding or transferring people to ICE. Although jails already send all fingerprints to ICE, 287(g) allows ICE to outsource their labor of immigration enforcement to local police, who help them by doing further investigation on people and filing preliminary paperwork like detainers, warrants, and Notices to Appear in immigration court.

287(g) Agreements Widen the Door to Racial profiling.
ICE’s influence in the criminal legal system undermines efforts to reduce biased policing. Local police access to immigration enforcement duties actually incentivizes racial profiling. When police officers know that an arrest can lead to immigration detention, they are more likely to stop or arrest Latinos or others who look or sound “foreign.”

287(g) Agreements Add to the Burden of Local Safety Net Programs like Foster Care.
Communities ultimately pay for the consequences of immigration enforcement. Some children whose parents or caretakers are detained or deported end up in the child welfare system, at the expense of states and counties. The Applied Research Center conservatively estimated in 2011 that more than 5,000 children were in foster care because their parents have been detained or deported. Assistance to ICE from local law enforcement puts an even greater burden on family services, child welfare programs, and safety net programs. Our county and state safety nets are already failing and we absolutely do not need to add to the burden.

Your Community’s Tax Dollars Are Wasted by Paying for the Costs of 287(g).
With 287(g) agreements, localities spend their own resources to make sure no one slips through ICE’s grasp. Jurisdictions with 287(g) shift resources away from local priorities and towards immigration enforcement via the staff time and salary used to inquire into immigration status, respond to ICE inquiries, collect data for ICE, or notify ICE about timing of inmates’ release. ICE does not reimburse any of these costs, meaning the county is essentially subsidizing deportations for DHS, which, with a budget of over $18 billion, is already the largest law enforcement agency in the country.

287(g) Agreements Expose Your City or County to Legal Liability.
Local law enforcement involvement in federal immigration enforcement has resulted in the violations of the constitutional rights of citizens and noncitizens alike. Furthermore, your town or county is liable for what happens to individuals detained on ICE hold requests, even if ICE caused their detention. Often times, there is no legal basis for local law enforcement to hold an individual on an ICE hold. As a result, lawsuits have been filed across the country, many resulting in damages against numerous city, county, and state corrections agencies.

As the representative of my voice in the democratic process on the county level, I urge you to postpone the vote on the Memorandum of 287(g) Agreement until the public can be more informed and give their opinion. I believe this will help repair the communication between the people and our Legislators.

Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
[Your Name]
[Your Address]
[Contact Information]