Railroad Police End Cooperation With ICE

Union Pacific meets ACLU demands to terminate "shadowy collaboration" with immigration enforcement

Image Credits: Bill Clark/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images.

Union Pacific Railroad has terminated its relationship with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in response to demands from open borders activists and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).

The ACLU announced the Union Pacific Police Department (UPPD) has ended its “shadowy collaboration” with ICE, adding that the federal agency settled a lawsuit filed on behalf of a “coalition of civil liberties and immigrant rights groups.”

The groups had previously sent a letter calling for changes to UPPD enforcement tactics, specifically as they pertain to immigration-related issues, claiming officers had engaged in actions “rooted in racial profiling in violation of constitutional rights” for decades.

New UPPD guidelines were announced in March.

“Personnel who encounter a non-employee on Union Pacific property shall not (a) use suspected immigration status as a factor in determining whether to confront, detain, or arrest the person; (b) ask the person to disclose his or her immigration status; (c) order the person to produce immigration documents; or (d) initiate contact with a federal immigration agency to report the person,” UPPD wrote in a police operations policy update on March 12.

Additionally, UPPD no longer honors ICE detainers not signed by a federal judge.

“UP’s collaboration with ICE threatened immigrant families and was inconsistent with the California Values Act,” said Jessica Bansal, a senior ACLU staff attorney.

“We are pleased the new policy cuts ties with ICE and will be monitoring closely to ensure the troubling practices revealed by the FOIA litigation do not return.”

Union Pacific Railroad operates 32,000 route miles in 23 states.

Rep. Matt Gaetz has filed a criminal complaint against Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg for lying to Congress under oath when he claimed there was no political bias at the social media network.

Dan Lyman: