Ernesto Galarza v. Mark Szalczyk
2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 4000
| 3rd Cir. | 2014Background
- Galarza, a U.S. citizen, was arrested for a drug offense and detained by Lehigh County under an ICE detainer after posting bail.
- The detainer described him as a Dominican Republic citizen and requested detainment for up to 48 hours to allow ICE custody transfer, but it lacked a warrant, probable cause affidavit, or removal order.
- Lehigh County Prison released Galarza only after the detainer was lifted, and he remained in custody for about three days despite bail.
- Galarza was not initially informed of the detainer’s basis or given a meaningful opportunity to contest it.
- Galarza later met ICE officers; the detainer was removed on November 24, and he was released; he was eventually acquitted of the underlying charge.
- The district court dismissed most claims against Lehigh County, citing the detainer regulation as mandatory, and the Third Circuit reversed, holding detainers are permissive (not mandatory).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether 8 C.F.R. § 287.7 detainers are mandatory or permissive. | Galarza argues detainers are mandatory orders. | Lehigh County argues detainers, using § 287.7(d), are mandatory commands. | Detainers are permissive requests, not commands. |
| Whether Lehigh County’s policy caused Fourth Amendment or due process violations. | Galarza contends county policy enforced detainers regardless of probable cause or citizen status. | Lehigh County contends policy was not the cause; detainer was optional. | Policy is not a defense; detainers are permissive. |
| Whether the anti-commandeering doctrine bars using detainers to compel state detention. | Detainers unlawfully commandeer state resources. | Detainers do not compel detention; they are requests. | Detainers do not compel state detention; no anti-commandeering violation. |
Key Cases Cited
- New York v. United States, 505 U.S. 144 (1992) (anti-commandeering limitations on federal commands to states)
- Printz v. United States, 521 U.S. 898 (1997) (struck down federal directives to state officers to conduct background checks)
- Arizona v. United States, 132 S. Ct. 2492 (2012) (recognizes states’ cooperation with federal requests; detentions not mandatory)
- Mercy Catholic Med. Ctr. v. Thompson, 380 F.3d 142 (3d Cir. 2004) (considers policy statements of immigration authorities in interpreting detainers)
- NCAA v. Governor of N.J., 730 F.3d 208 (3d Cir. 2013) (anti-commandeering doctrine applied in federalism context)
- Ortega v. U.S. Immigration & Customs Enforcement, 737 F.3d 435 (6th Cir. 2013) (detainers described as requests; non-mandatory)