SACRAMENTO, Calif. — A new bill introduced in the California State Assembly would bar individuals who worked for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement under the Trump administration from becoming teachers or law enforcement officers in the state, KTVU reported.
Assembly Bill 1627 would disqualify current ICE employees from future employment in two major sectors: education and law enforcement. Specifically, it would prohibit them from serving in any California state or local police agency or working as teachers, administrators or staff in public schools, including the University of California and California State University systems.
| DOWNLOAD: How to launch a DFR program
The bill’s authors say the bill is a direct response to what they describe as abuses of power and civil rights violations by federal immigration officers during the Trump-era crackdown and ongoing operations.
AB 1627 is currently a proposal and would need to pass both houses of the Legislature and be signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom to become law. It could be heard in committee as early as Feb. 26.
Do you believe prior service with a federal agency should ever be grounds for disqualification from local law enforcement jobs? Why or why not?
Police1 readers respond:
- I only believe prior service with a federal agency should only be grounds for disqualification from local law enforcement jobs if and only if the applicant was fired or found guilty of a crime by a jury of his/her peers from any past occupation, whether that was from prior service from a federal agency or whatnot. Otherwise, if disqualified only based upon serving the government with a federal agency, this would be grounds for discrimination and should lead to a huge lawsuit on behalf of the applicant.
- These laws, as in other states will be overturned. Title VII has protections re discrimination against persons of a particular class (not necessarily just those often mentioned). Laws that discriminate should not be tolerated. Disparate impact, which focuses on the effect of a policy, and intentional discrimination, which focuses on the motive behind the law will result in overturning laws that are enacted out of prejudice.
- The background of a potential candidate in any of these fields should always be considered and evaluated, as you would and should evaluate the background of ANY candidate. An applicant with prior employment with ICE (under President Trump’s administration) makes this bill against President Trump, not the great employees of ICE. Scrutinize prior service and make sure you are hiring a good fit, qualified for the local or state position. Just about the time you think you’ve heard it all...... Here comes California.
- Disqualification for any job because of previous lawful employment is discrimination. It is the same as refusing to hire someone due to skin color, gender, or religion.
- Absolutely not! This bill seems unconstitutional at first glance as it seems to treat everyone who is employed by ICE, under the Trump Administration, as a convicted criminal. How do you justify this type of prohibition to the former ICE employee who worked 20 years for the agency and has a spotless record - guilty by association. Isn’t this the exact profiling behavior liberals decry? Yet one more reason not to live or work in California as a law enforcement professional!
- No, I believe cutting off people from career fields based on previous employment alone is not right. Many people leave jobs/career fields for another once they realize that the culture in it is not for them. I started my law enforcement career in a county that did not provide any room for advancement, and I jumped into a federal agency that did not meet my expectations of what a law enforcement agency should be like. I left that agency, but it took 3 years of applying to other agencies before I could leave. Why penalize a person for working at a department, earning a paycheck, hopefully learning skills along the way, that they can later use in the new job/career field. Not everything learned is a negative, maybe learning that an agency isn’t being run very well is the lesson and reason to leave.
- I certainly hope someone challenges this in court if it passes.
- As a retired LEO and former chief of police, the answer is “No.” We actively recruit applicants with MP/SP military service. While the current proposed legislation is targeting DHS/ICE specifically, what is to keep the legislation from morphing to target ALL prior federal service of any type? The answer is: “Nothing.” Purely partisan politics at its worst.
- No, because this California is nothing but the hatred of Neuscum against President Trump and what the majority of this nation voted for.
- Never. Only a blue state politician would come up with this nonsense.
- This has to be one of the most stupid, reactionary “laws” ever proposed. It’s not going to be legally enforceable as wrong doing has to be proven on a per person basis, not for an entire industry. It would be no different than saying, “I hear Burger King employees spit in food, so we’re making a law against former BK employees working in the food industry.” Absolute stupidity.
- Absolutely not! This bill seems unconstitutional at first glance as it seems to treat everyone who is employed by ICE, under the Trump Administration, as a convicted criminal. How do you justify this type of prohibition to the former ICE employee who worked 20 years for the agency and has a spotless record - guilty by association. Isn’t this the exact profiling behavior liberals decry? Yet one more reason not to live or work in California as a law enforcement professional!
- This is open discrimination against a group of people sworn to uphold the Constitution. ICE did not write the immigration law they only enforce it. Why not ban the people who wrote the law? or the people that voted for it? This is ridiculous.
- No. And by proposing this sweeping bill they are discriminating by association against anyone who has served with ICE and not been prosecuted for abuse of power.
- This is ridiculous. Typical of what comes out of Sacramento. It is as stupid as Swalwell’s claim he is going to take away the drivers licenses from any ICE Agents here in CA if he becomes Governor. I thought we were not supposed to paint groups of people with a broad brush or does that just apply when liberals are being called out. They should be judged on suitability based on qualifications, background and abilities. If they don’t meet the hiring standards then don’t hire them. Federal employees can bring their perspectives and experience which may be beneficial. Usually, they have a bigger picture view, depending on their assignments, Not everyone in ICE is involved with field operations. Typical CA liberal misguidance.
- This is such a bad idea that for doing your job can be a bad thing especially upholding the law that we all hold dear to our hearts is just crazy. As a retired law enforcement individual I would and have taken closer look at those officers applying further east because I wondered about their willingness to let stuff go that we did not all because of policy not because of who they worked for.
- No. This liberal garbage piece of proposed legislation is tapered at both ends, and is nothing more than California Democratic lunacy which prevails in what used to be the Golden State. Furthermore. I think such a law would not pass Constitutional muster.
- The U.S. Congress should respond to this threat by introducing a bill that would prohibit Californians from receiving any federal benefits.
- Absolutely not. That bill is biased and discriminatory against a group of people. California is as radical as it gets. Try and pass a bill against another set of people based on race or what country they are from and the same group against ICE agents will be up in arms.
- Typical Democratic nonsense. We are working on turning this State RED! This is one reason of 100 to do so.
- Absolutely not. If state officials want to entertain their fantasy that ICE will cease to exist, they should not remove employment options. Do Califorinia officials wish to be dealing with unhoused former ICE officers in the future?
- NO! This is just another liberal reaction showing just how much they are out of touch with reality.
- No! Furthermore, to propose legislation that would do this is absolutely discriminatory.
Trending
FBI Director Kash Patel said agents are on scene of an “apparent vehicle ramming and active shooter situation” at Temple Israel synagogue in West Bloomfield Township
This year’s survey examines what officers experience during a patrol shift — from call load and backup availability to reporting time and proactive policing opportunities
Free webinars and daily wellness resources will address injury recovery, mental health, resilience and agency wellness strategy
“I saw the device hit the floor...” Sgt. Luis Navarro said. “I knew that I needed to save lives. So I ran towards the people to make sure that nobody got hurt.”
