1. United States
2. Wash.
3. Letter

The recent bipartisan deal to reassess funding for DHS is encouraging. The short window for negotiations needs to result in real change. Given the clear violations of constitutional rights and liberties perpetuated by Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Patrol agents across the nation, significant reform of their mandate and procedures is needed. I would propose restricting CBP to within 5 miles of the border and refocusing their effort on border protection at the border. The 100 miles zone currently in place encourages abuse. These agents also need stricter restrictions on use of force, limited access to military gear, and training on how to support asylum seekers in humane fashion. They should be kept away from all law enforcement activities outside of the border. I would propose ICE be refocused on enforcement of immigration and customs violations with distinct units focused on interaction with civil violations of immigration law (e.g., overstaying a visa) and different units working directly with local law enforcement to remove criminals here illegally. These crime focused units may have basic armament, but should rely primarily on local police if use of force is needed. The ICE agents enforcing civil violations do not need arms and should not be sanctioned to use force. If compliance with a civil arrest is problematic, they can get a judicial warrant and work with police to enforce their orders. And of course, no CPB or ICE officer should ever have their face covered. All should have their name and ID displayed prominently, and all should be trained in civil rights and appropriate de-escalation strategies. No ICE or CPB officer should ever feel free to approach an individual without a specific warrant. No ICE or CPB officer should claim authority to arrest or detain citizens or to do citizenship checks outside of a designated border check point. No ICE or CPB officer should be involved in crowd control or reaction to protests. That is for local police to handle. Detention for immigration violations should be temporary and must adhere to rules for humane detention. The current ramp up of improper detention facilities should be stopped and part of negotiations should be rescinding the unreasonable funding surge for these agencies. Current facilities will have to do. To reduce the need for detention, funds should be focused on funding immigration hearings to resolve cases without the need for detention. And finding procedures for tracking individuals in the community awaiting a hearing without detention. In the end, of course, a simple course would be to repeal the Homeland Security Act of 2002 in its entirety. It was a bad idea then and the reasons why have become abundantly clear in the last year. A band aid will not fix the current mess. Major reform is needed.