Multiple public commenters urge Luzerne County Council to reject 287(g) involvement and resist ICE cooperation
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Sign Up Free
Summary
Public comment at the June 24 meeting featured several residents urging the council and district attorney not to enter partnerships with ICE under 287(g) or related agreements; speakers said such cooperation undermines trust and due process and could deter crime reporting.
At public comment periods during the June 24 Luzerne County Council meeting several residents urged councilors and the district attorney to oppose participation in 287(g) immigration-enforcement agreements with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
Andrea Glaude and Laura Panaro spoke during the public-comment portion. Glaude cited constitutional due-process principles and criticized cooperation with ICE as an "affront" that, she said, undermines the pledge of "liberty and justice for all." Panaro urged the council not to approve a 287(g)-style program, saying it would encourage law enforcement practices that skirt constitutional protections, erode public trust, and place immigrants in vulnerable positions.
A written comment from Linda Paul at Wilkes University, read into the record by council staff, opposed any proposed 287(g) agreement and argued that involving local police in ICE activity reduces resources for investigating serious crimes and discourages reporting of crimes by immigrant communities.
Speakers urged the district attorney and council to pursue alternatives that prioritize due process, community safety and civil-rights protections. No council vote on a 287(g) agreement was recorded at the June 24 meeting; the discussion occurred in public comment rather than as an agenda item.