The American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona says the Tucson Police Department deliberately prolongs traffic stops in an effort to enforce a section of SB 1070 and check people’s immigration status—which is in violation of TPD’s own policies and constitutional rights, an ACLU of Arizona press release says.

The organization sent a letter to new TPD Chief Chris Magnus today demanding the department to change its SB 1070 enforcement procedures, based on a review of TPD’s traffic stop records from June 2014 to December 2015, which, according to the ACLU of Arizona, showed “constitutional problems” in most of the stops reviewed—85 out of roughly 110 cases where TPD got Border Patrol involved. Many of the stops were over minor traffic violations that “led to unlawfully prolonged detention, including transport to Border Patrol custody,” the press release says.

More than a dozen records revealed immigration checks producing false positives, or “hits,” resulting in extended detention of U.S. citizens and other lawfully present individuals. In some cases, families with young children were detained roadside in order for the parents to be handed over to Border Patrol agents.

The U.S. Supreme Court recently said in the case Rodriguez v. United States that any traffic stop lasting longer than seven or eight minutes past the time needed to address the alleged violation is unconstitutional. TPD data shows the department’s routine stops last anywhere between 15 minutes to three hours to wait for Border Patrol to show up. Most of the stops reviewed by the ACLU of Arizona were between one and two hours long, the press release says.

The letter highlights more than twenty case examples, including:
A mother driving her two children to school was stopped and found to have a suspended license, for which she could have been cited and released. Instead, TPD detained her until Border Patrol arrived to take custody, over an hour after the officer’s immigration check and one hour and twenty minutes after the stop was initiated.

Two individuals stopped for speeding identified themselves as “DREAMers.” The officer advised them “they were being detained as they had provided no evidence of being in the US legally” even though that is not a crime and gave the officer no authority to detain them. The officer requested Border Patrol respond to the scene. Border Patrol arrived but declined to take either subject into custody and the stop was concluded—one and a half hours after it was initiated.

A driver was stopped and found to have a suspended license. The officer conducted an immigration check, which indicated the driver was undocumented. Border Patrol arrived and determined the driver was a U.S. citizen—one hour after the immigration check was initiated. TPD cited and released the driver four minutes later.

Records also showed that TPD officers have not received specific training on the department’s immigration policy since July 2014. At the time, the ACLU of Arizona says, TPD agents merely took a 12-page online training course.

Last year, former TPD chief Roberto Villaseñor announced changes to TPD’s SB 1070 enforcement rules—the police would not get involved with immigration enforcement unless those detained have felonies on their records, are affiliated with a gang, are identified as terrorists, or pose a threat to national security. The changes better matched the Department of Homeland Security’s criteria, and President Barack Obama’s 2014 immigration executive action, which reinforced that the government should focus on deporting criminals.

The letter sent to Magnus details policy changes recommendations and demands Magnus to launch an immediate review of TPD’s immigration policy and to “implement all necessary changes to ensure officers are not exceeding the lawful scope of their authority,” as well as to limit Border Patrol involvement and oversight in routine traffic stops.

The ACLU of Arizona also submitted a letter to the Department of Homeland Security asking for an investigation into Border Patrol’s “improper involvement” in TPD traffic stops,” the press release says.

Added after publication:
Magnus sent a statement on Monday afternoon that said he plans to meet with the ACLU next week. 

“I plan to give thoughtful consideration to the issues raised in the letter with an eye toward identifying any opportunities to improve our training, policies, and practices…Information in the ACLU letter will be of value in our evolving efforts to retain and further strengthen a trusting relationship with all members of the community, as we endeavor to fairly enforce the law,” the statement said. 

This article appears in Apr 28 – May 4, 2016.

I was born and raised in Guatemala City, Guatemala. I moved to Tucson about 10 years ago. Since I was old enough to enjoy reading, I developed an interest in writing, and telling stories through different...

16 replies on “ACLU of Arizona: Tucson Police Unlawfully Prolong Traffic Stops to Investigate People’s Immigration Status”

  1. Uh, excuse me but the Mayor made us a sanctuary city. What would we do with the illegals we found?

    This government is not deporting criminals. They are allowed to stay here and continue to kill Americans.

    Pass Kates Law now!

  2. If we traveled in Mexico or anywhere in the world they would check our papers and documents. It happened when i lived in South America. If you where legal then no problems, and yes i had to wait in long lines and i did not feel threatened nor looked down on. What is it with people.

  3. This might be off-topic here, but the subject of carrying a valid identification – expired identification isn’t worth the plastic it’s printed on – in a post-9/11 world goes beyond civil rights, it is about public safety. Do I like the fact that we need to show “our papers”, no, but the world is a much more dangerous place now and we cannot afford to naively trust someone is who they say they are without a valid identification. Can people get fake ID, sure, but that is another issue. I wholeheartedly agree that racial profiling directly or indirectly by using immigration status or homeland security as an excuse is wrong; however, I also believe that anyone not carrying a valid picture identification has no room to complain if they are lawfully stopped and it takes more than seven or eight minutes to verify their identity.

  4. Make Arizona Mexico Again!

    5th poorest city in the country, and DAMN proud of it.

  6. tucsonmac? Mexico is not a good example of other nations checking papers.

    I’ve driven at least 25,000 miles throughout Mexico and have never once been asked to show my papers. The same is true among friends of mine.

    Go see for yourself. Do take a trip soon. You’ll be greeted with smiles by everyone you meet.

  7. Hola, What,Again!

    My honest response to your comment is another big yawn.

    But I must commend you for being consistent in your hatred for all things Mexican.

    Meanwhile, I do hope you are enjoying your morning burrito.

  10. From a legal standpoint Rodriguez v. the United States is not applicable. That case dealt with what took place after all the basic traffic related tasks were performed, ie checking ID, verifying registration, issuing a ticket, etc.

    In these cases in Tucson the traffic incident is being postponed because they are getting hung up on the traffic related tasks, namely the ID check. There are consequences for people when they break the law and it is our police officers duty to verify the identification of people they pull over. When they are unable to determine identity or nationality or if they determine that a person has a felony against them while here illegally they will contact border patrol.

    We live an hour from the border along one of the busiest human smuggling corridors in the world, it is only to be expected that some of the burden of this will fall upon the local community and our law enforcement. We need to insure that the rights of US citizens are not being compromised, but if you are a US citizen and driving without any kind of identification that is where the problem is, not with the police who are mandated to identify you step one….

  12. I’m not buying it. The local cops didn’t want to do immigration enforcement in the first place. Why should I believe they are deliberately killing a bunch of extra time doing it? Especially with our head-in-the-sand sanctuary city status…. ACLU, go fish.

  13. If Maria reports it and ACLU open border advocates against it, I am for more illegal scrutiny and Police enforcement, not less. Of course none of the illegals darken Sanctuary City Rothschild’s neighborhood!

  14. Debbie T…You should be banned.

    But since you’re not bold enough to establish an account, it will never happen. You and your crew, including Rat T (or rat t or Rat t or rat T or Ratt [Back for More!] or whatever…), David W, Julie Heston and What, Again…should all be banned.

    At least CW 13 (whatever that means) had the balls to establish an account. At least Old Pueblo Independent/Old Pueblo Veteran/Desert Patriot or whatever pseudonym he’s using these days, seems to have the sense to have gone away. Please, do us all a favour and follow in his footsteps. Your riddance will be a welcome one. DC

  15. Spoken like an open minded liberal AZ/DC. You may have missed the post I referenced. It called for shooting police officers. Maybe you didn’t.

    I’m not sure what you mean by establishing an account. I thought I did. But why ban us for commenting? That doesn’t seem very open minded.

  16. I am not concerned with the post which you made reference to. You should be banned because of your general ignorance.

    Considering the fact that you are so closed minded, I give you credit for noticing that I am open minded. But your closed-mindedness defaults to labeling me as a liberal when I singled you out, and believe me, that just isn’t the case.

    If I can’t click on your screen name to access your posts, you are not using your account. If you have established one, then grow a pair and use it.

Comments are closed.