Who is Responsible for the Sting in Danburry, CT?

ICE says it conducts all operations legally. that Danburry police initiated the arrests in question. Danburry says ICE did it.
Either way, they are being sued for arresting without probable cause - a violation of the Fourth Amendment.

What about the times that ICE has entered schools? people's homes? or Jack in the Box? Especially since the Swift raid, ICE has continuously violated the Fourth amendment. See post "Knocks and Talk," September 26, 2007.

___

Challenge in Connecticut Over Immigrants’ Arrest
By NINA BERNSTEIN
New York Times
Published: September 26, 2007

Nine day laborers are expected to file a federal lawsuit today challenging the legality of a sting operation in Danbury, Conn., last year that led to their arrest on immigration charges.

Those plaintiffs, and a tenth man whose traffic stop for a noisy muffler resulted in his deportation to Ecuador, contend that their arrests were illegal and part of a campaign based on racial profiling. They also say that the city of Danbury, its mayor, Mark D. Boughton, and its police chief acted to enforce federal immigration law without authority.

...The plaintiffs charge that they were arrested without probable cause, in violation of the Fourth Amendment. The suit also contends that the arrests violated the First Amendment because they were calculated to silence the laborers’ expression of their availability for work in a traditional public forum, and to chill the speech of other day laborers who now avoid the park for fear of arrest.

“Looking at a group of day laborers and assuming that they are undocumented is a form of racial profiling,” said Geri Greenspan, one of the law students working on the case with Michael Wishnie, a Yale law professor.

...Federal immigration agents have maintained that the arrests were initiated by the Danbury police, she said, while Danbury officials insist that it was a federal operation.

None of the day laborers arrested had an outstanding order of deportation, the lawsuit says, and immigration officers involved in the operation were not looking for a fugitive at the Danbury park, which might have provided a rationale for a federal immigration operation.

According to the police incident reports filed at the time, the day laborers were arrested by the police at 7 a.m. on a charge of entering the country illegally, a federal misdemeanor. Connecticut law does not authorize local Danbury police to make warrantless arrests for federal misdemeanors, Ms. Greenspan said, and the officers had no evidence of illegal entry into the country.

In the case of the 10th plaintiff, Danilo Brito Vargas, the lawsuit charges that his arrest in February was part of a pattern of police stopping Hispanic drivers on the pretext of minor traffic infractions, then investigating the immigration status of the drivers through the National Crime Information Center database, and arresting them for civil immigration violations.

...Michael Gilhooly, a spokesman for the federal immigration agency, said the agency had not seen the complaint. But he added: “Immigration Customs Enforcement conducts all of our operations lawfully and in full accordance with ICE policies and procedures.”

For complete article click title of this post

photo: http://www.latinodawah.org/newsletter/img2k5/imancentral4.jpg