This Community News Service story was originally published in December, 2023. June 3, 2024 the ACLU of Vermont filed suit against Essex County Sheriff Trevor Colby for failure to produce public records as the legal group pursued Colby’s alleged violation of the State of Vermont ‘fair and impartial policing policy’ policy, especially his cooperation with federal immigration officials.
The Essex County border with Canada is part of the Swanton Sector (covering upstate NY, Vermont and NH), the section of U.S. border with the highest rate of increased illegal crossings in the nation.
Said ACLU legal director Lia Ernst on June 4: “Vermont’s Public Records Act ensures access to public information, a foundation of transparent and accountable government. Sheriff Colby’s refusal to comply with that law is deeply troubling, particularly since the records concern his office’s compliance with the state’s Fair and Impartial Policing Policy (FIPP). Local law enforcement should not be in the business of enforcing federal immigration law, and Vermont sheriffs need to be held accountable.” – VDC Editor
by Charlotte Oliver, Community News Service
The first two years Rossy Alfaro lived in the U.S. she almost never left the dairy farm where she worked. She feared a familiar encounter, that if she ever headed to the grocery store she’d see red and blue lights in her rearview and suddenly find her future hinging on the discretion of an officer she didn’t trust.
That hypothetical cop would’ve been protected by the law in calling federal immigration agents — something migrant workers around the state fear could lead to their detention or deportation, Alfaro said.
“It was one of the saddest times in my life,” said Alfaro, an organizer for activist group Migrant Justice who came to the States about five years ago, speaking through a translator.
Late last month police policymakers greenlit what migrant rights activists consider a victory in their goal of preventing routine interactions with law enforcement from turning into deportation.
A committee of the council that regulates police training on Nov. 20 approved changes to state policies that would bar police from sharing information about people in Vermont with federal immigration agents, except in specific felony cases.
The proposal needs to be approved by the full Vermont Criminal Justice Council, which is expected to discuss the measure Dec. 19. But vocal support from migrant rights activists, and precedent in Vermont for the change, is competing with concerns about the legality of the committee’s policy change and, from law enforcement, wariness about restrictions on their jobs.
“A policy like that is beyond frustrating,” said Essex County Sheriff Trevor Colby, who works in the most rural part of the state along the state’s border with Canada. He doesn’t want to see the proposed changes put into effect because he thinks they would make it harder for law enforcement officers to perform their duties.
For activists like Alfaro, the risks of keeping law enforcement and immigration communications unregulated are too great. “If people were really to put themselves in our shoes and understand the realities that we’re dealing with, then we would see faster action on this issue,” she said, expressing frustration that the first step in shifting the policy came only after years of activism and change isn’t guaranteed.
The council committee originally voted to approve the set of policies in a Nov. 7 meeting, but confusion over the particulars pushed the officials to set a revote. Activists considered the disputed language — regarding police sharing information about citizenship status — the most important part of the proposal.
In their deliberations committee members were choosing between two pairs of policies: one endorsed by Migrant Justice, the other by the Vermont attorney general’s office. The former sought further restrictions on police and barred sharing citizenship information. The latter was more tempered and, in the eyes of attorneys for the state, would have avoided putting Vermont in conflict with federal law — and its own.
In both the initial Nov. 7 vote and the Nov. 20 revote, the committee approved the policies endorsed by Migrant Justice. Committee members representing law enforcement largely opposed the approved measure — just like Colby, the sheriff in Essex County.
“We don’t need further restrictions on what we’re already doing,” he said. He characterized the policy as something designed to “trip up” law enforcement officers who typically aren’t focused on immigration.
“It’s not like we’re spending all this energy focusing on people that are here illegally,” said Colby, estimating his department had relayed about 20 cases to immigration authorities in the last year, not a particularly high figure in his mind.
The Community News Service repeatedly reached out to eight sheriff’s departments and seven municipal police departments over the course of two weeks, all of which either declined to comment or did not answer, other than Colby’s. Micheal O’Neil, executive director of the Vermont Troopers Association, also declined to comment.
Alfaro said in her community she hears many stories about police unnecessarily contacting immigration authorities, making undocumented people feel like the police wouldn’t support them if they needed their protection. Enrique Balcazar, another organizer for Migrant Justice, told the Community News Service last month about an incident involving the Grand Isle County Sheriff’s Department in which he thought immigration agents were unnecessarily involved. (The department did not answer repeated requests for comment.)
In some cases, said Colby, jurisdiction isn’t clear cut. He told a story to illustrate the point:
This month, someone who lived about 200 feet from the border with Canada found a strange vehicle in their driveway and called the police, Colby said. Colby said the only reason he didn’t call immigration authorities in that case was because the caller couldn’t give the plate numbers and no deputy could respond at the time.
He emphasized that his priority is to keep residents within his jurisdiction safe, and people in his relatively remote part of the state get shaken up when they see unfamiliar folks. Up there, he said, everyone basically knows everyone.
Colby said he would likely call immigration authorities after a traffic stop if he thought the people in the car were undocumented. He seemed concerned that the proposed policy could limit his ability to prevent drug trafficking and other crimes. “I mean, not everybody who comes into this country is doing that. But what about the ones that are?” he asked.
Despite the push for the policy change coming from activists in Vermont, Colby said he felt like the policies reflect national agendas, rather than the local issues he encounters. He said the policy reflects a lack of understanding of how police function.
The Vermont attorney general’s office in the Nov. 7 police policy committee meeting indicated it couldn’t endorse the policies because they directly contradict federal law. Speaking at that meeting, Assistant Attorney General Erin Jacobsen cited federal restrictions that say local police can’t be prohibited from sharing citizenship information with federal agents. She also added that, according to Vermont statute, any laws in conflict with those federal laws are nullified.
The office’s stance made sense to Jessica Brown, the director of Vermont Law and Graduate School’s Center for Justice Reform. “I’m not surprised that the attorney general’s office is taking the position that they’re taking,” Brown said, agreeing the contradiction with federal law was pretty clear.
But she noted an apparent contradiction: “I’m curious why the attorney general’s office, for example, is worried about this statute conflicting with federal law and not about … drug laws conflicting with federal law.”
Colby said he hoped the policy wouldn’t be passed by the council at large. Alfaro said its passage can’t come quick enough.
“We hope that the Criminal Justice Council will act quickly to accept those recommendations, strengthen the policy, so that we can live free lives as human beings and enjoy the rights and liberties that we deserve,” said Alfaro.