Welcome to the Los Angeles Times' little world. In that world, it's unusual to enforce our immigration laws. Needless to say, the ACLU lives there too. Unfortunately, our "homeland security president" and his underlings live in that very same world.

From the LAT comes "Local Police, U.S. Agents Differ on Raids" (AP summary in "Local police didn't tip federal agents in SoCal immigration sweeps"):

When U.S. Border Patrol agents arrested more than 400 undocumented immigrants a year ago in controversial Southland sweeps, they said they acted partly in response to tips from local law enforcement agencies.

But hundreds of pages of documents about the raids, released by federal officials in response to a lawsuit from the ACLU, show no specific evidence of such tips, and several police agencies told The Times last week that they did not inform Border Patrol agents of the whereabouts of suspected illegal immigrants before the sweeps...

...The Escondido Police Department was the only one of seven agencies contacted by The Times not to dispute the Border Patrol's claims...

The Border Patrol says the tips may have come through unofficial channels, have been made by citizens, made confidentially, etc. etc.

...The sweeps raised protests among politicians, church leaders and the Mexican government because they extended well beyond the border and caused fear in immigrant neighborhoods, even among people in the U.S. legally.

Despite the overwhelming cultural presence of 'Born in East L.A.', those who are here legally have nothing to fear except the possibility of a slight inconvenience. As for those politicians et al., do some or all really have the best interests of the U.S. at heart? (See "AVWatch: Villaraigosa's under-reported associations" and "Rep. Joe Baca is making sense") As for the Mexican government, should we allow them to dictate our immigration enforcement policies? Aren't they - like some or all of the politicians - just on the other side?

Subsequently, the Department of Homeland Security determined that the agents did not get required approval from headquarters and did not coordinate with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the agency primarily responsible for immigration violations away from the border. Homeland Security officials then clarified that the Border Patrol should concentrate on the border, major transportation hubs and travel routes north...

There's a story for the Times: why did the DHS cave in? Are they corrupt or just scared of far-left racial demagogues?

...The documents, sought by the ACLU in a lawsuit alleging possible violation of immigrants' rights...

...ACLU attorney Ranjana Natarajan said she believes the dozen agents harassed "day laborers and other vulnerable workers" out of frustration over the Inland Empire's growing immigrant population.

"It looks like it was a bunch of cowboys at the Temecula office who wanted to do more," she said. "They clearly wanted to do interior enforcement... They didn't bother to get any approval."

So, the ACLU says it's "harrasment" to enforce our laws. And, those who do so are "cowboys." Did we need reminding of which side they're on? See "The enemy within".

...The sweeps had a profound effect in some areas: Some immigrants said they were scared to go to local markets or schools...

Memo to the Times: legal "immigrants" have nothing to fear from the BP. Those who are here illegally shouldn't be attending schools in the first place.

Also see:
Reports on the Temecula townhall meeting
"Homeland Security? Not Yet"
Search for Hutchinson for more