Stanton Argues Against ICE Blocks Congressional Access to Arizona Detention Center

Congressman Greg Stanton was trying to visit a detention center in Arizona when federal immigration officials refused him admission, which raised concerns about monitoring duties and federal law compliance.

Rep. Greg Stanton, was denied access to the Eloy Detention Center on July 25 when he came to meet detainees, including Arizona restaurant owner Kelly Yu, who has been detained for months, and conduct congressional oversight.

Public Law 118-47, which gives members of Congress the power to enter immigration facilities without prior notice for oversight purposes, was one of the documents Stanton was carrying. 

The legislation provides that: "Nothing in this section may be construed to require a Member of Congress to provide prior notice of the intent to enter a facility described in subsection (a) for the purpose of conducting oversight."

The facility's Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers denied Stanton admission despite the obvious legal authorization.

"I wanted to provide that oversight and we were denied," Stanton said. "I'm not surprised, and we're certainly going to be challenging it."

Stanton called the denial illegal and expressed concern about federal law enforcement agencies ignoring established law.

A similar event happened last week when Rep. Yassamin Ansari tried to visit the facility to see how the sick detainees were doing but was turned away.

ICE and the Trump administration's Department of Homeland Security have made a point of upholding immigration law, with officials regularly pointing to their pledged obligation to do so. Nonetheless, some claim that the agencies are applying legal compliance criteria unfairly.

Employees of the federal government swear to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic," which includes upholding the oversight power of Congress.

Stanton expressed his intention to challenge the decision on social media, describing it as "a clear violation of federal law" that "should concern us all."