In May, the ACLU of Wyoming filed a state lawsuit challenging the Laramie County Sheriff’s contracts with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
We're arguing that the Laramie County Sheriff’s Office broke the law by signing the county’s 287(g) agreements and contracting with ICE – effectively deputizing local law enforcement to operate as immigration agents – without authorization from the Laramie County Commission and without any input from the community.
We’re asking the court to declare the agreements invalid and we filed a motion for preliminary injunction, which would halt the county’s 287(g) agreements as the case moves forward. Not surprisingly, the sheriff’s office would like the case dismissed.
Next week, the ACLU will stand before the First Judicial District Court in Laramie County to argue on behalf of the plaintiffs that there is no legal reason to dismiss – or throw out – the case. The hearing will take place at 10 a.m. July 27 on the third floor of the Laramie County Government Complex at 309 W. 20th St. in Cheyenne.
While courtroom procedures don’t move as swiftly as they do on TV or in the movies, there is a lot at stake, and we wanted to answer some frequently asked questions.
Who is involved in this case?
The ACLU filed this lawsuit on behalf of three plaintiffs: Juntos, the Unitarian Universalist Church of Cheyenne, and Drew’s Barbershop. Each has had to significantly alter their
their normal operations to respond to the consequences of the county’s involvement with the 287(g) program.
The defendants are Brian Kozak, in his official capacity as Laramie County sheriff, and the Laramie County Sheriff’s Office
The judge who will preside over the hearing is the Honorable Robin S. Cooley.
What will the defendants be arguing at the hearing?
Laramie County Sheriff Brian Kozak is asking Judge Cooley to dismiss the lawsuit, arguing that the plaintiffs didn’t follow notice requirements under the Wyoming Governmental Claims Act and that the plaintiffs “lack standing.” Standing is a legal term meaning a plaintiff has a right to bring a lawsuit.
What will the ACLU be arguing at the hearing?
On behalf of the plaintiffs, the ACLU is asking Judge Cooley to deny the defendants’ motion to dismiss and that the lawsuit should proceed.
The ACLU will also argue that the plaintiffs do indeed have standing to bring the case and that they have enough of a connection to and harm from the contracts to sue. We will explain how Juntos, the Unitarian Universalist Church of Cheyenne, and Drew’s Barbershop each have had to significantly alter their organizational interests, budgets and programming because of Sheriff Kozak’s choice to enter into the 287(g) agreements without abiding by the relevant state laws. We will also detail why the Wyoming Government Claims Act’s procedural requirements do not apply to our case.
Can I come to the hearing? What can I bring?
Hearings are open to the public and anyone can come. However, there are some rules of conduct once inside a courthouse, and even stricter rules inside a courtroom itself. Anyone attending will have to go through security, be required to turn off cell phones at certain times, and be forbidden from bringing food and drink into the courtroom. Also, no one is allowed to record the court proceedings.
When will a decision be made? What happens next?
That’s up to Judge Cooley. It is unlikely, but she could decide to rule on the motion to dismiss from the bench. It is more likely that she will wait to issue a written ruling over the next few days, weeks, or months. All we can do is wait and see!
How can I get involved?
When it comes to decisions that affect our communities, Wyomingites deserve a transparent, democratic process. Wyoming sheriffs aren't above the law. They cannot exercise unchecked authority to make decisions that harm our neighbors, friends, and family. Regardless of what happens with this case, will you help us take a stand against 287(g) throughout the state? Add your name to help us fight back.
