In summary

The Trump administration’s plan to publish a weekly shame list of so-called “sanctuary” jurisdictions has been put on ice over concerns they have contained inaccurate or misleading information.

Public shaming isn’t as easy as it looks.

After issuing only three reports, the Trump administration’s plan to publish a weekly list of so-called “sanctuary” jurisdictions has been put on ice over concerns they have contained inaccurate or misleading information.

According to Department of Homeland Security spokesperson David Lapan, the federal government will not restart the program until officials can “make sure that we’re getting it as accurate as possible.”

The weekly report is a new, and perhaps short-lived, innovation of the Trump administration. In the first days of his presidency, President Trump signed an executive order calling upon the Department of Homeland Security to publish a weekly tally of jurisdictions that have “ignored or otherwise failed to honor” requests from federal immigration authorities to hold suspected undocumented immigrants on the basis of their presumed immigration status.

In its last two reports, the department singled out the state of California, as well as 36 of its 58 counties.

But the weekly detainer lists have been plagued with mistakes from the get-go. According to a series of corrections published by the Department of Homeland Security, in its first report, detainer request statistics were misattributed to “Franklin Counties” in three states, much to the consternation of officials in those identically named but otherwise very distinct jurisdictions.

Additional errors were made regarding a number of counties in Texas.

According to the president’s executive order, the weekly list was intended to “inform the public regarding the public safety threats associated with sanctuary jurisdictions.”

No corrections have been made regarding California jurisdictions, where many law enforcement agencies refuse to honor federal detainer requests out of fear of violating the state Trust Act, a law that bars state and local law enforcement officers from holding non-felons in custody solely at the request of ICE. Other agencies have expressed concern about exposing themselves to lawsuits relating to racial profiling or violations of due process.

We want to hear from you

Want to submit a guest commentary or reaction to an article we wrote? You can find our submission guidelines here. Please contact Gary Reed with any commentary questions: gary@calmatters.org, (916) 234-3081.

Ben Christopher

Ben covers California politics and elections. Prior to that, he was a contributing writer for CalMatters reporting on the state's economy and budget. Based out of the San Francisco Bay Area, he has written...