The Denver City Council’s 10-1 vote opposing the upcoming Initiative 100 is a welcome sign of opposition to a misleading measure that purports to aim a backhanded blow at illegal immigration — but could violate the rights of thousands of legitimate citizens while burdening Denver taxpayers.
We’ve been worried from the beginning about this initiative’s ambiguous and potentially biased language and urge Denver voters to defeat it on Aug. 12.
Mayor John Hickenlooper also has come out in opposition to this poorly crafted scheme, which he estimates could cost the city more than $1 million annually, including the cost of hiring 12 more sheriff’s deputies to enforce it.
The initiative’s overall wording suggests that, if stopped by Denver police, unlicensed drivers could face having their cars impounded — and be forced to pay a fine to have the vehicle released. However, an underlying phrase sets the real tone of the proposal: “including illegal aliens.” This is coupled with a definition of an illegal alien.
Keep in mind that existing city ordinances already give police the right to seize vehicles, including those operated by illegals, under numerous circumstances. Initiative 100 would impose an additional requirement in such cases of showing proof of citizenship and/or legal immigrant status in the United States. That could lead to unintended racial profiling — as well as burdening police with time-consuming paperwork.
It is clear that the real aim of Initiative 100 is to address the problem of undocumented immigrants. But while we are never in favor of anything that smacks of providing a sanctuary status or a “bye” on city or state laws, this measure would fall heavily on all ethnic minorities, including American citizens and foreign visitors to Denver. That could hurt our city’s tourism business as well as our reputation for basic fairness.
Ultimately, if Initiative 100 is passed, its fate may be determined in the courts, where its constitutionality would be tested. The legal auguries aren’t promising, because a federal appeals court already has ruled that vehicles driven by unlicensed drivers can be impounded only if they cannot be driven away by a licensed driver or secured and legally parked. Otherwise, such impoundments violate constitutional protections against unreasonable seizure.
Assistant City Attorney David Broadwell in a May 2 memorandum cited this ruling along with several other legal concerns and operational impacts regarding the measure.
Turnout for the vote, part of Colorado’s primary elections, could be low. So we call on Denver residents to go out in force and vote “no.”
Then, continue to push your congressional representatives to do something substantive about illegal immigration. This ordinance is a direct result of our broken and unworkable immigration system.
