City officials submitted their application to the Department of Homeland Security in February 2008, after much local controversy.
Immigrant businesses throughout the city shut their doors for a day then in protest of the partnership, and hundreds of people descended on City Hall for the Common Council meeting when the application was approved by a vote of 19-2.
Now, notwithstanding the fact that I detailed the massive size of the protest on my site, and that the News-Times front page article the day after the 287g vote last year cited "thousands" of protesters, it's important to also mention that every single media outlet that were in attendance at City Hall on that fateful day echoed the same figure.
If that's not enough, here's video footage of the protest...
At a time where leaders at City Hall are in full PR spin mode over the ICE ACCESS program, it's important for reporters not to downplay the number of residents who are opposed to the implementation of this program.
04.25.22 (RADIO): WSHU Latino group call on Connecticut lawmakers to open a Danbury charter school
06.03.22 (OP-ED): KUSHNER: "Career Academy ‘a great deal for Danbury"
On September 26, 2007, ten plaintiffs filed suit in response to an arrest of aday laborers at a public park in Danbury, Connecticut. Plaintiffs amended their complaint on November 26, 2007.
The amended complaint states that plaintiffs sought to remedy the continued discriminatory and unauthorized enforcement of federal immigration laws against the Latino residents of the City of Danbury by Danbury's mayor and its police department.
Plaintiffs allege that the arrests violated their Fourth Amendment rights and the Connecticut Constitution because defendants conducted the arrests without valid warrants, in the absence of exigent circumstances, and without probable cause to believe that plaintiffs were engaged in unlawful activity. In addition, plaintiffs allege that defendants improperly stopped, detained, investigated, searched and arrested plaintiffs. Plaintiffs also allege that defendants violated their Fourteenth Amendment rights when they intentionally targeted plaintiffs, and arrested and detained them on the basis of their race, ethnicity and perceived national origin. Plaintiffs raise First Amendment, Due Process and tort claims.
Plaintiffs request declaratory relief, damages and attorneys fees.
On September 26, 2007, ten plaintiffs filed suit in response to an arrest of aday laborers at a public park in Danbury, Connecticut. Plaintiffs amended their complaint on November 26, 2007.
