Three police departments in Allegheny County quietly inked agreements to cooperate with ICE in November, but at least two promptly changed course as the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown and related backlash continue.
The agreements, signed by police departments in Munhall, Springdale and Stowe, fall under a “task force model” that effectively deputizes local police officers to operate as immigration agents, including questioning people about their citizenship and immigration status.
In all three municipalities, senior officials said they were unaware of the agreements, raising questions about the legal processes underlying them.
After a Public Source inquiry, Stowe and Munhall terminated their short-lived agreements with ICE.
As of Thursday evening, those police departments no longer appeared on ICE’s list of local law enforcement agencies that have agreed to cooperate on immigration enforcement. ICE did not respond to a request for comment. The agency’s arrests in the Pittsburgh region through mid-October were more than triple the number from the same period last year.
Munhall goes from ‘cleaning up’ to canceling
Reached Thursday, Munhall Police Chief Jamie Caterino confirmed he entered into the agreement with ICE, which according to the agency was signed Nov. 18.
Caterino, who became chief of police on Aug. 19, said ICE approached him after one of his officers was asked to assist in a local operation.
He said he entered into the agreement “just to help with cleaning our town up with some of the illegal immigrants. … We do have a lot down here.”
He added: “My impression [of the agreement] was to help these undocumented immigrants to get the proper documentation.”
His officers, he said, would not be involved in “hitting any houses or local businesses. This is strictly traffic enforcement.” He said officers would ask for citizenship status during traffic stops.
Caterino said he had discussed the agreement with Mayor Rob Falce, who “gave me his blessing.” Falce, reached later Thursday morning, said he was not aware of the signed agreement. That afternoon, Caterino said the agreement had been canceled following a conversation he had with Falce.
“We just removed ourselves from that program,” he said.
Discussions with the mayor, the chief said, will be ongoing, and the borough may enter into a such an agreement, known as a 287(g), in the future. “It’s something that I think would be good for our borough.”
Falce declined to comment on whether he would support such an arrangement with ICE. “It’s something that I have to look into,” he said. Falce said the agreement was terminated at his direction, but declined to clarify if he had initially given his support to the chief.
Stephen Loney, attorney at the Pennsylvania ACLU, said any agreements brokered by a municipality should be approved in a public vote by the council or commissioners, rather than a unilateral move by law enforcement.
“Any time a municipality or an arm of the municipality is entering into an agreement to cooperate with another government agency, specifically federal government agencies, then the municipality’s governing body has to approve it,” he said, citing the state constitution’s Intergovernmental Cooperation Act.
Earlier this year, the ACLU sued the Bucks County sheriff, alleging he “unilaterally and illegally” signed a 287(g) agreement with ICE, failing to consult county commissioners, the majority of whom opposed the partnership. A judge dismissed the case in October, though the ACLU is appealing. Bucks County has separately filed a claim against the sheriff. The sheriff, Frederick Harran, was voted out of office in November, and his successor has vowed to end the agreement with ICE.
That case law, Loney said, focused at the county level, but for “municipal police departments, either township or borough, in theory the same principle would apply,” and a municipality’s governing body “should have to approve” any agreement with federal law enforcement, including ICE.
Stowe president not in the know
Stowe, like Munhall, rescinded a newly inked 287(g) agreement Dec. 4 following an inquiry from Public Source.
Deputy Chief Charles Wilker confirmed Thursday that the department had signed the agreement with ICE, but the department had sent a letter that day notifying the agency of its withdrawal.
“We don’t want to be participating,” he said.
Wilker said he is still considering an agreement with ICE in the future, but the department will “want to negotiate” with the board of commissioners beforehand. He said any agreement would be to “keep our community safe,” adding: “We’re not going to go out and do raids or anything like that, but we’d help them out if needed.”
Stowe’s governing body does not appear to have been consulted by the police department before the agreement was inked Nov. 18. Reached Wednesday, township commission President Cheryl McDermott said she was not aware of any formal partnership between Stowe police and federal immigration enforcement.
Stowe police Chief Matthew Preininger did not respond to requests for comment.
McDermott said she supports the police department “100%,” but expressed concern about how ICE has operated since the federal immigration crackdown began at the start of the second Trump presidency.
“What bothers me is the fact that they’re looking at the color of people’s skin, their accent,” McDermott said, “These people are human beings. I mean, I’ve watched some of these ICE raids, I’ve watched how they mishandle people, and I think it’s horrible.”
McDermott said she is concerned that an agreement would open the township up to ICE’s “questionable tactics,” including the detention and arrest of immigrants without criminal histories.
Springdale: ‘That’s news to me.’
In Springdale, Borough Manager Terry Carcella was not aware of the agreement, signed Nov. 6 according to ICE records. “That’s news to me,” he said, adding that such an arrangement would usually be brought to council’s attention. He said the agreement was neither discussed publicly nor brought before council.
Springdale police Chief Derek Dayoub did not respond to requests for comment. Mayor Joel Anderson also did not respond.
“Without these agreements and without approval of their governing body, there’s nothing else in Pennsylvania law that authorizes [local police departments] to start detaining people for immigration purposes,” Loney said. He also said that an agreement, approved by a governing body or not, exposes a municipality to a greater risk of liability.
“By expanding a police department’s duties to include all the things that ICE does, you’re opening the door to a lot more violations than would otherwise occur. And when they occur, you’re expanding the county’s liability or the municipality’s liability.”
Quinn Glabicki is a reporter at Pittsburgh’s Public Source. He can be reached at quinn@publicsource.org and on Instagram @quinnglabicki.
This story was fact-checked by Jamie Wiggan.
MOST READ STORIES
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
