Immigration events spur policy discussion

Monday, April 15, 1996

Some insist that law enforcement policy abuses civil rightsBy
Michelle Best

Daily Bruin Contributor

In the aftermath of the recent beating of two Mexican immigrants
in Riverside County, and the death of seven illegal immigrants near
Temecula, questions have risen about how best to deal with illegal
immigration ­ and how to avoid the horrifying incidents of the
last two weeks.

As media attention focused on the two incidents, both Mexican
and American attentions have focused on the underlying problems
with illegal immigration along the U.S./Mexico border and U.S.
policy toward such.

Some Mexican politicians contended that these two incidents are
not isolated events ­ but part of a common pattern
demonstrated by U.S. immigration policy.

Mexican Congressman Adolfo Aguilar Cinser said that Mexico must
make these events into political and diplomatic issues ­
taking the matters to the International Court of Human Rights so
that the United States will begin to enforce the proper message
regarding immigration.

"The increasingly coercive U.S. approach to immigration ­
policies of anti-immigration ­ has resulted in a series of
human rights abuses; it has been approached in a very narrow view
by the U.S.: simply as a law enforcement issue," Cinser said.

But Richard Rogers, Los Angeles district director of Immigration
and Naturalization Services, disagreed, saying that U.S.
immigration policy is simply a unilateral law enforcement policy.
He contended that policy is balanced between facilitating legal
immigration and combating illegal entry.

This year in Los Angeles alone, the services will naturalize
more than 250,000 people and will ­ although down from last
year ­ issue 1 million visas, Rogers said.

The Riverside incident, in Rogers’ eyes, highlighted the
conflict for police of going after smugglers versus going after the
illegal immigrants themselves.

"Not taking away from the beating and the inappropriate use of
force, the fact of the matter is that (the incident in Riverside
County) was started by a smuggler that had a complete disregard for
human life," Rogers said. "That is what must be concentrated on and
stopped as much as possible."

Nonetheless, California Democratic Party Chair Art Torres said
that this distinction was meaningless. Human rights were violated,
and law enforcement ought to correct itself, he said.

"Whenever there are human abuses that are not justified by the
action of those that are being abused, I think any human being has
to speak out against that type of behavior," Torres said.

"Law enforcement alone will not deal with the problem of illegal
immigration, it is much too complex to narrow the scope to just
this type of action," he added.

Adding a legal perspective on the debate, UCLA law Professor
Cruz Reynoso said that illegal immigrants carried the same rights
as citizens, requiring law enforcement to treat them as if they
were here legally.

Additionally, Reynoso explained, the two immigrant victims in
last week’s beatings are entitled to file civil rights lawsuits
under federal law.

"The Federal Civil Rights Statute does not apply to just
citizens. Each individual has the right to be treated fairly by any
and all public officials," said Reynoso, an expert in civil rights
law. "(The two victims of the beating) are entitled to that
protection, therefore the question is, ‘has that protection been
violated?’"

Currently, federal statute defines civil rights in terms of
race, gender and a number of other factors, which have been
interpreted by the courts to include national origin for illegal
immigrants. Reynoso said this would entitle immigrants ­ who
were beaten because of their illegal status ­ to sue in
federal court for civil-rights damages.