The Lackawanna County commissioners will likely vote next month on setting standards for county employees who encounter immigration enforcement agent requests for help, a commissioner said Wednesday.
Board of Commissioners Chairman Thom Welby said the vote would likely take place at the board’s April 1 meeting. Welby also said he’s developed an alternative to Commissioner Bill Gaughan’s Protect Our Neighbors Act aimed at regulating contact with the agents.
Welby circulated his proposal to his fellow commissioners earlier this week but declined to disclose it after a meeting Wednesday.
“Because we have to discuss it ourselves before we share it with the public,” Welby said.
Last month, Gaughan released the county solicitor’s legal analysis of his proposal anyway after the commissioners wouldn’t approve doing that. He deferred to Welby on releasing the new proposal.
Proposals under debate
In general, Gaughan’s legislation would forbid county employees from cooperating with Immigration and Customs Enforcement unless agents have a court order or judge-issued warrant.
Welby said his proposal closely resembles Gaughan’s, but Gaughan challenged that during and after the meeting.
“First of all, I think that we share the same goal, and that is to protect our residents, support our employees, and make sure the county is acting within the law,” Gaughan said.
However, Welby’s policy amounts to “internal guidance” that leaves “decisions (by employees) up to interpretation,” he said.
“It does not create clear, enforceable boundaries, and I believe that the Protect Our Neighbors ordinance that I put forward ... does do that,” Gaughan said. “But I am happy to have the conversation and discuss those differences with Commissioner Welby.”
Chermak weighs in
Commissioner Chris Chermak said Gaughan’s proposal lacks an enforcement provision.
“We have to look at it, and we'll make the best decision that we possibly can and do what we think is right and what's legal,” he said. “And we have to protect, not only the residents of Lackawanna County. We have to protect the employees here in the building. So, you know, it's not just a simple thing, and I can't ... put laws in place just on the basis of morality. What's moral, what's not moral, that's not my decision ... We will follow the law, and we will have discussions, and we'll make the appropriate decisions.”
That comment referred to two speakers earlier in the meeting who mentioned the morality of ICE’s federal immigration crackdown, which prompted Gaughan’s proposal.
Unhappy with Chermak
Chermak’s comment brought a rebuke from speaker Maria Johnson, who chairs the theology/religious studies department at the University of Scranton.
“What I had to say has been driven out of my mind by the extraordinary statement that, oh, law lives in a separate world from morality and good and evil,” Johnson said. “Commissioner Gaughan’s proposed bill stays within the law. It says keep the law. Expect people in the county to keep the law. It's not advocating rebellion in any sense.”
'Not the time for meekness'
Amanda Karpiak, a Scranton resident, mentioned fears raised in the solicitor’s legal analysis about a potential federal backlash if the county passes Gaughan’s proposal.
“I just want to say that now is not the time for cowardice. Now is not the time for meekness, and now is not the time for concessions,” Karpiak said.
“We need to draw hard lines against the abuses and constitutional violations that we've been seeing across the country, and we need to stand up, both within and outside of government. We're all caring citizens here. We're all neighbors and friends," Karpiak said. "
If we can't draw a hard line against ICE as a county, after all they're doing and after all they have done, what is the point of government? What is the point of saying we can work together to the benefit of the people?”
