# Can state officials arrest violators of federal crimes? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 3, 2010, 12:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-state-officials-arrest-violators-of-federal-crimes/538095 "2010-05-03T00:36:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 9\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2014, 3:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-state-officials-arrest-violators-of-federal-crimes/538095/41 "2014-01-15T15:53:27Z")
> [@Rumor\_Watkins](#): > > of course, taking a textualist view… “this Constitution” is not federal law… To support the Constitution is to support laws made under it. ---
**Author:** ![lawbuff](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/13edae/32.png) [@lawbuff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lawbuff)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2014, 4:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-state-officials-arrest-violators-of-federal-crimes/538095/42 "2014-01-15T16:02:22Z")
14 We noted just recently that state law enforcement officers within the Tenth Circuit “have the general authority to investigate and make arrests for violations of federal immigration laws,” and that federal law as currently written does nothing “to displace . . . state or local authority to arrest individuals violating federal immigration laws.” United States v. Vasquez-Alvarez, 176 F.3d 1294, 1296, 1299 n.4, 1300 (10th Cir. 1999). Rather, we observed that federal law “evinces a clear invitation from Congress for state and local agencies to participate in the process of enforcing federal immigration laws.” Id. at 1300. [http://openjurist.org/264/f3d/1188/united-states-of-america-v-jose-de-jesus-santana-garcia-gonzalo-alonso-ruiz-tovar](http://openjurist.org/264/f3d/1188/united-states-of-america-v-jose-de-jesus-santana-garcia-gonzalo-alonso-ruiz-tovar) ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2014, 4:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-state-officials-arrest-violators-of-federal-crimes/538095/43 "2014-01-15T16:10:08Z")
> [@lawbuff](#): > > 14 > > We noted just recently that state law enforcement officers within the Tenth Circuit “have the general authority to investigate and make arrests for violations of federal immigration laws,” and that federal law as currently written does nothing “to displace . . . state or local authority to arrest individuals violating federal immigration laws.” United States v. Vasquez-Alvarez, 176 F.3d 1294, 1296, 1299 n.4, 1300 (10th Cir. 1999). Rather, we observed that federal law “evinces a clear invitation from Congress for state and local agencies to participate in the process of enforcing federal immigration laws.” Id. at 1300. > [264 F3d 1188 United States of America v. Jose De Jesus Santana-Garcia Gonzalo Alonso Ruiz-Tovar | OpenJurist](http://openjurist.org/264/f3d/1188/united-states-of-america-v-jose-de-jesus-santana-garcia-gonzalo-alonso-ruiz-tovar) SCOTUS implicitly reversed Vazquez-Alvarez in _Arizona_: > [@](#): > > Federal law specifies limited circumstances in which state officers may perform the functions of an immigration officer. A principal example is when the Attorney General has granted that authority to specific officers in a formal agreement with a state or local government. See § 1357(g)(1); see also § 1103(a)(10) (authority may be extended in the event of an “imminent mass influx of aliens off the coast of the United States”); § 1252c (authority to arrest in specific circumstance after consultation with the Federal Government); § 1324(c) (authority to arrest for bringing in and harboring certain aliens). Officers covered by these agreements are subject to the Attorney General’s direction and supervision. § 1357(g)(3). There are significant complexities involved in enforcing federal immigration law, including the determination whether a person is removable. See Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. ––––, –––– – ––––, 130 S.Ct. 1473, 1488–1490, 176 L.Ed.2d 284 (2010) (ALITO, J., concurring in judgment). As a result, the agreements reached with the Attorney General must contain written certification that officers have received adequate training to carry out the duties of an immigration officer. See § 1357(g)(2); cf. 8 CFR §§ 287.5(c) (arrest power contingent on training), 287.1(g) (defining the training). > > Arizona v. United States, 132 S. Ct. 2492, 2506 (2012). The 10th Circuit in _Vazquez-Alvarez_ read these provisions as conferring jurisdiction _in addition_ to a sort of common-law enforcement power; SCOTUS said they are the _only_ means under which state peace officers may enforce federal immigration law. ---
**Author:** ![lawbuff](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/13edae/32.png) [@lawbuff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lawbuff)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2014, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-state-officials-arrest-violators-of-federal-crimes/538095/44 "2014-01-15T16:11:54Z")
> [@Clothahump](#): > > [ > In a nutshell, yes. Assume that I, as a deputy sheriff, gain lawful entry to a house (for whatever reason). While I’m in there, I see a press, paper, ink and what appears to be counterfeited money. I am obligated to arrest anyone in the house. Does your state have a criminal simulation statute? I think that would apply also. ---
**Author:** ![lawbuff](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/13edae/32.png) [@lawbuff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lawbuff)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2014, 4:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-state-officials-arrest-violators-of-federal-crimes/538095/45 "2014-01-15T16:14:03Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > SCOTUS implicitly reversed Vazquez-Alvarez in _Arizona_: Implicitly or expressly? If I am not mistaken the case law I remember dealt with other federal crimes too. I checked, but the MB I was on is closed down, so I could not research it there. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2014, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-state-officials-arrest-violators-of-federal-crimes/538095/46 "2014-01-15T16:18:03Z")
Well, they expressly rejected the V-A _holding_, but they didn’t mention the case by name. It was cited with approval by the dissent in the 9th Circuit. As to non-immigration matters, you’re right: > [@](#): > > In the absence of a specific federal statute, the validity of an arrest without a warrant for violation of federal law by local peace officers is to be determined by reference to local law. See Miller v. United States, 357 U.S. 301, 305 (1958); United States v. Di Re, 332 U.S. 581, 589 (1948). ---
**Author:** ![lawbuff](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/13edae/32.png) [@lawbuff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lawbuff)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2014, 4:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-state-officials-arrest-violators-of-federal-crimes/538095/47 "2014-01-15T16:28:48Z")
Yeah, Miller sounds awful familiar!! As I said in post 39; “It is up to an individual state to permit what federal case law does though” ---
**Author:** ![Melbourne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b5e925/32.png) [@Melbourne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Melbourne)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2014, 2:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-state-officials-arrest-violators-of-federal-crimes/538095/48 "2014-01-16T02:54:19Z")
For what it’s worth, in this Jurisdiction, a police officer is REQUIRED to prevent crimes, and is PERMITTED to arrest people on suspicion. Since I am not a police officer, I can make a citizens arrest, but I am never REQUIRED to do so, and I am not PERMITED to do so on suspicion. With regard to federal laws, my local police officers [used to be] in the same position as I am. Like me, they are not required to make an arrest to stop the commision of a federal-only crime. Like me, they would not be protected from false-arrest claims if they were only trying to prevent the commission of a federal-only crime. Even supposing that an individual police officer here was foolish enough to perform an arrest he was not required to do, and which made him potentially liable to disciplinary action, you would still have to suppose that he/she recognised a particular federal-only crime. This combination [was] uncommon. In practice, the state police here [used to] prefer to work with federal public servants who have powerful relevant search & seizure powers, but no arrest powers, and the federal public servants like to work with the state police, who have limited search and seizure powers, but strong powers to arrest people who try to stop federal public servants by violence or abuse. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2014, 1:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-state-officials-arrest-violators-of-federal-crimes/538095/49 "2014-01-16T13:49:58Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > Let me bounce this idea off the Board. > > _Citizens_ are clearly allowed to travel freely from state to state (Article 4 and Amendment 5). I don’t think the same can be said for non-citizens, thus it may be constitutional for Arizona to ban non-citizens from entering the state so long as it does not conflict with Federal naturalization law. If the Fedlaw says legal aliens have the right of travel, then Arizona cannot prevent them from coming in the state, but I highly doubt the law says that illegal aliens can freely travel around the U.S. I doubt that works. The Constitution refers to citizens of a STATE being able to live in or visit other states. It’s essentially a way of conferring national citizenship to all state citizens. It doesn’t imply that states can regulate the passage of those who aren’t citizens of any state, just that they can’t restrict “privileges and immunities” of their state to their own citizens. Obviously no law allows illegal aliens to travel around (by definition), but there’s also no law that says they can’t pass from state to state either. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-state-officials-arrest-violators-of-federal-crimes/538095.md?page=2)