Customs and Border Protection is making news again for its aggressive immigration enforcement — this time, questioning Canadian fishing vessels in disputed international waters. 

According to a CBP spokesperson, the agency has questioned 21 Canadian vessels since October 2017, plus an unknown number of American vessels (mostly Maine fishermen) in the same area. Although CBP claims that these operations fall within its immigration enforcement authority, nobody should be surprised to learn that targeting these fishing boats has yielded no immigration arrests. 

This naturally provokes a question: So why is CBP invading people's privacy and wasting its own time and resources, given the (unsurprising) absence of any immigration activity in this active fishing area? The unsatisfying answer is that we don't know because CBP is a secretive and opaque agency that refuses to comply with federal disclosure laws even when asked. That’s why we have sued CBP to produce records about its immigration enforcement in Maine. 

What we do know is that CBP is the nation’s largest law enforcement agency, with money and resources to burn. So we should all be concerned when CBP claims virtually untrammeled authority to stop and question people within 100 miles of a land or sea border. This so-called 100-mile zone includes all of Maine, most of New England, and about two-thirds of the entire U. S. population. Within this zone, CBP claims it can stop any car, boat, plane, or train without a warrant, probable cause, or reasonable suspicion, the usual requirements under the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. 

Given CBP's massive resources, broad claim of authority, and the Trump administration's anti-immigrant policies, it is not surprising that we have seen an increase in immigration enforcement within the 100-mile zone. For example, according to one of the fishermen stopped by CBP, most of the local Maine fishermen along the coast have been recently questioned by CBP. These recent occurrences are in contrast to his experience over the past 40 years when CBP did not operate offshore. 

Inland, there are reports of immigration enforcement in previously safe locations, such as courthouses. Throughout New England, CBP has set up immigration checkpoints to stop and question every passing car to check passengers' immigration status. And at bus stations, CBP agents have asked ticketed passengers for their citizenship status before letting them board the bus, which resulted in a Concord bus employee making the absolutely false claim that only citizens could ride the bus. 

CBP even arrested a French jogger who accidentally crossed the border from Canada, transporting her in a caged vehicle and holding her in custody for more than two weeks. And on top of it all is the Trump administration's cruel "zero tolerance" policies separating parents from their children. 

CBP denies that there is an increase in enforcement. But so long as they refuse to back up that claim with any records or statistics — which the public is entitled to under federal law — we will continue to believe the many people who have reported increases in enforcement. 

As all of these examples attest, the claimed 100-mile zone represents a massive intrusion on all our rights. People should not have to submit to warrantless, suspicionless stops by armed law enforcement officials, regardless of whether they are on an inland highway, at the bus station, or at work fishing for their daily catch.  

Simply put: It doesn't have to be this way. 

CBP's claimed authority rests on a half-century-old regulation passed without any explanation in the 1950s. Although some cases have allowed CBP searches at permanent checkpoints or on vessels at the border, the Supreme Court has not approved all enforcement operations within the 100-mile zone. Far from it. Instead, in cases like United States v. Brignoni-Ponce, the court has upheld Fourth Amendment rights within the 100-mile zone. And a recent New Hampshire court decision found that CBP’s checkpoint operations were “unconstitutional under both State and federal law.” 

So what rights do we all have when stopped by CBP? 

If you are an immigrant with valid documentation, it may be advisable to turn it over. But regardless of your status, try to remember three things in any interaction with a CBP agent. First, you have the right to invoke your right to remain silent, and then remain silent. Second, you can tell the CBP agent: "I do not consent to a search," if it appears the interaction is heading in that direction. Finally, you can ask at any time, "Am I free to leave?" and, if the answer is yes, you can leave. 

Plus, so long as you do not interfere with the CBP officer's operations, you have the right to record the CBP agent. Then you can use that recording to speak out. And you can tell other people about their rights, loud and clear. 

Perhaps most importantly, we all have the right to speak out against invasions of privacy, to tell our elected representatives that enough is enough, and to call our local ACLU affiliate when CBP goes too far. 

These rights belong to all of us, regardless of citizenship or immigration status. And yes, that includes any Canadian fishermen who might be within United States borders. 

Each week we will provide you with a rundown of top news stories and must-read articles.

Orlando police continue to test facial recognition product

The Orlando Police Department has decided to keep testing a facial recognition product developed by Amazon. Dozens of civil rights groups have voiced concerns over the use of facial recognition by police departments.

China provides an example of how technology like facial recognition and artificial intelligence can we weaponized by the government. The Chinese government is using these new technologies to tightly control and track their citizens.

THE ACLU’S TAKE

Kavanaugh must state position on Roe v. Wade

On Monday, President Trump announced that Brett Kavanaugh would be his nominee to replace Justice Kennedy. When confirmation hearings begin, it is our Senators' job to ensure we know where Kavanuagh stands on abortion.

TAKE ACTION

Changes to Michigan voting system coming

Michigan has one of the most outdated voting systems in the country. Currently a Michigan resident must register to vote 30 days before the election, early voting is exceedingly difficult, and military personnel overseas face barriers when trying to cast their vote. With over 400,000 signatures collected, there will be a proposal on the November ballot to fix all of this.

THE ACLU’S TAKE

House Reps propose allowing adoption agencies to discriminate

Members on the House appropriations committee adopted a measure that would allow adoption agencies to discriminate against LGBTQ couples on the basis of religious discrimination without losing federal funding.

UPDATE: This law went into effect on December 13, 2018.

The goals of Maine’s legal system should be to advance justice, to promote rehabilitation, and to make communities safer. But too many of our policies focus on punishment without considering whether they actually help us achieve those goals. Too often, people face harsh penalties that don’t match their actions, and that do nothing to benefit society. 

For example, under current Maine law, failure to pay a fine related to a criminal offense results in an automatic driver’s license suspension. But suspending someone’s driver’s license for failure to pay a fine only makes it harder for that person to pay the fine. For many Mainers, no driver’s license means no way to get to work. No work means no income to pay the fine and no income to get the license back. It’s an unending cycle that makes no sense.

By design, this policy hurts low-income Mainers the most. People with enough money can simply pay their fines and move on; it is only those who don’t have enough money to pay their fines that face this particular consequence.

And the harms go beyond money. The ability to drive in Maine is crucial to nearly all Mainers, and taking away a license can hurt entire families. This is especially true in rural areas with no public transportation systems. Without a valid license, parents may be unable to get their children to daycare, doctor’s visits, and other crucial appointments.

In this way, our current policy essentially punishes people twice because they are poor – creating different systems for those who can pay and those who cannot. Possessing a driver’s license should be about being a safe driver, not about whether you have enough money to pay fines.

For those reasons, we supported LD 1190, “An Act Regarding Driver’s License Suspensions for Nondriving-related Violations,” to end the practice of automatic license suspensions for non-driving offenses. The bill passed in both the House and the Senate, but was vetoed by the governor last week. But on Monday, the legislature overwhelmingly voted to override the governor’s veto: 129-15 in the House, and a unanimous vote in the Senate!

The costs of the current system, both financial and human, are too high. The current system disproportionately hurts families, rural Mainers, and people with low incomes. It traps people in the criminal justice system, rather than helping them make a successful return to society.

In about three months, when the new law goes into effect, Maine will take a big step forward to help put people back on track, instead of punishing them for being poor.