https://soundcloud.com/thepurplestatereport/scotus-and-life-after-roe

With Justice Kennedy’s retirement and Trump’s nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court there are a lot of anxieties about civil liberties in general, but specifically reproductive rights. On this episode, ACLU of Colorado Reproductive Rights Campaign Coordinator Delana Maynes interviews Reproductive Rights Policy Council Lizzy Hinkley on the real possibility that the Supreme Court could overturn Roe v. Wade. Later we invite special guest Karla Gonzales Garcia, Policy Director at COLOR (Colorado Organization for Latina Opportunity and Reproductive Rights), who will explain why many women are already living in a post-Roe world. But first Delana interviews Executive Director of ACLU of Colorado Nathan Woodliff-Stanley who gives an overview of the most recent Supreme Court term.

Call To Action: Send a message to your senators right now to demand that they get Kavanaugh's clear position on Roe v. Wade on the record before the confirmation vote. Go to: http://bit.ly/2LCAhxp

To learn more about COLOR go to: https://www.colorlatina.org/

The Purple State Report is brought to you by the ACLU of Colorado. Our show was produced by Vanessa Michel, John Krieger, and Alejandra Garza with original theme music by Pablo Novelas. Additional music by Empress Of. If you have feedback or suggestions for future episodes email us at [email protected].

BY: Nathan Woodliff-Stanley, Executive Director, and Denise Maes, Public Policy Director


Use of violent force is never something to celebrate. Any time law enforcement officers legitimately use force or violence against people in the communities that they serve, it is at best an unfortunate part of the job that should be kept to the minimum amount necessary to control a situation.
Yet in the El Paso County Jail in Colorado, Sheriff’s Deputy Sandra Rincon was celebrated with a tiara, a “princess” plate, and a cake with the number “50” on top. The number, however, wasn’t her age. It referred to the number of times she had used force against prisoners, ranging from handcuffing to punching and kicking. She was the winner of what one of the county jailers called a “fight club,” crowning whoever used force most often as the champion.
The “fight club” competition was uncovered in the course of a lawsuit filed by civil rights attorney Darold Killmer, which charged sheriff’s deputies with using excessive force against his client, Philippa McCully. The deputies, according to McCully, knocked her legs out from under her and shoved her to the floor, fracturing her knee, tearing her ACL, and bruising her badly. After the “fight club” competition was revealed, the county settled McCully’s case for $675,000.
The uncovering of the “fight club” did lead to an investigation, but that investigation fell far short of being genuine and robust. The investigation largely minimized the culture of violence that led to the “fight club” coming to be in the first place. There were written reprimands, but no demotions, no transfers, or dock of pay for anyone involved, and there was no other disciplinary action along the lines of limited suspension. The competition was dismissed as little more than “bad judgment,” and the county denied that it resulted in increased use of force, even though incidents of use of force nearly doubled during the first two years of the competition.
Use of force is no joking matter, especially in a time when community’s trust in law enforcement has been eroded by repeated incidents of excessive and even lethal force against unarmed community residents, especially people of color, usually with little or no accountability for officers involved. Excessive force is always wrong, whether the perpetrators are police officers on the streets or corrections officers in prisons and jails.
The county’s dismissal of the “fight club” as simply bad judgment only exacerbates the distrust between the community and law enforcement. Indeed, it may further erode it. Rather than essentially turning a blind eye, the county should use this as an opportunity to revisit its use of force policy, double down on investments in training (not reduce them), and commit to greater accountability on the part of the sheriff’s department.

DENVER – The ACLU of Colorado filed a lawsuit today against Teller County Sheriff Jason Mikesell alleging that he is violating Colorado law by continuing to jail an individual who is eligible for release, at the request of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

Leonardo Canseco is charged with two misdemeanors, and the Teller County Court set his bond at $800. According to the lawsuit, the sheriff is acting on a detainer request from federal immigration authorities, who suspect that Canseco is removable from the country. An ICE detainer asks sheriffs to keep prisoners in jail after they would otherwise be released, to provide time for ICE to take them into federal custody for immigration proceedings.

“Colorado sheriffs have no authority to enforce federal immigration law,” said ACLU of Colorado Legal Director Mark Silverstein. “Being present in the country in violation of the immigration laws is a civil matter, not a crime. When Mr. Canseco posts his $800 bond for his minor misdemeanor charges, Colorado law requires the Sheriff to release him. Instead, at ICE’s request, the Sheriff plans to keep him in jail, without a warrant, without probable cause of a crime, and without any other valid legal authority.”

ACLU of Colorado successfully raised the same issues earlier this year in a class action lawsuit asserting that El Paso County Sheriff Bill Elder had unlawfully imprisoned dozens of individuals at the request of ICE. In March, District Court Judge Eric Bentley ordered Sheriff Elder to release two ACLU clients and to stop relying on ICE detainer requests as grounds for refusing to release individuals when they post bond or resolve their criminal cases. 

In 2014, ACLU of Colorado wrote to Colorado sheriffs explaining that when they hold a prisoner on the basis of ICE detainer requests, they are making a new arrest without legal authority. ACLU of Colorado then negotiated a $30,000 settlement with Arapahoe County on behalf of Claudia Valdez, a domestic violence victim who was held for three days after a judge ordered her release because the jail honored an ICE detainer request. 

Within a few months, every Colorado sheriff receiving the ACLU letter declared that they would not hold prisoners for ICE without a warrant signed by a judge. The County Sheriffs of Colorado issued a statement in which it explained that sheriffs have no authority to do so. By the end of 2016, more than 500 state and local law enforcement agencies around the country were declining to hold prisoners on the basis of ICE immigration detainers and ICE administrative warrants. 

“Colorado law is clear that sheriffs cannot hold prisoners for ICE based on a detainer request,” Staff Attorney Arash Jahanian said. “The statewide sheriff’s organization got it right, and then Judge Bentley correctly ruled that Sheriff Elder had to release our clients from the El Paso County Jail when they posted bond. Now, we’re asking a court to order Sheriff Mikesell to let Mr. Canseco out of the Teller County Jail when he posts bond. State law requires it.”

The ACLU lawsuit, filed in Teller County District Court, seeks a declaratory judgment and an emergency order ensuring Canseco’s release. Canseco is represented by Silverstein and Jahanian of the Colorado ACLU and Byeongsook Seo and Stephanie Kanan of Snell & Wilmer L.L.P.

more on this case