Mecklenburg Democrat who voted for ICE bill owes her community an explanation | Opinion

When the North Carolina House voted Tuesday to require sheriffs to cooperate with federal immigration authorities — the third time in four years it has passed such a bill — three Democrats joined Republicans in supporting the measure.

One of those Democrats was Tricia Cotham, a Mecklenburg Democrat who represents Mint Hill and parts of east Charlotte.

House Bill 10 would require sheriffs to notify U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement if they can’t determine the citizenship status of someone charged with certain high-level offenses, such as murder, rape or violations of a domestic violence protective order. It would also require sheriffs to honor voluntary detainers issued by ICE. If a person subject to an immigration detainer is in the sheriff’s custody, the sheriff would be required to take them before a state judge, who would order the person to be held for 48 hours or until ICE picks them up.

The bill is opposed by more than 120 local, regional and national organizations as well as a number of county sheriffs, including Mecklenburg County Sheriff Garry McFadden. McFadden has vowed not to cooperate with ICE since his election in 2018; ending the county’s 287(g) agreement was one of his biggest campaign promises.

Gov. Roy Cooper vetoed previous iterations of the bill in 2019 and 2022. But this time, the legislation passed the House with enough votes to potentially override a veto.

Opponents of the bill say it would jeopardize trust between law enforcement and immigrant communities and could lead to overpolicing. Rep. Laura Budd, another Mecklenburg Democrat whose district neighbors Cotham’s, said in committee that the bill is a “smokescreen for racial profiling.” She read aloud a statement from McFadden voicing his opposition to the bill.

“I remain steadfast in my belief that the people of each county as reflected by the decisions of the Sheriff whom they elected should retain the ability to decide within the clear confines of the law as to what extent local law enforcement might cooperate with federal immigration authorities,” McFadden said in that statement.

Mecklenburg County’s 287(g) program sent more than 15,000 people into deportation proceedings between 2006 and 2018, The Charlotte Observer previously reported. But that doesn’t mean that cooperation with ICE was protecting Mecklenburg County from 15,000 violent criminals. Even minor, non-violent offenses can send people into deportation proceedings, and in some cases ICE mistakenly detains people who are already U.S. citizens. The bill’s opponents also say ICE may sometimes issue detainers without probable cause.

House District 112, which Cotham represents, has one of the highest concentrations of Latino voters of any House district in the state. More than a fifth of the district’s residents identify as Hispanic or Latino, according to 2020 population data.

Since being sworn in as a member of the House earlier this year, Cotham’s actions have disturbed some Democrats. On Wednesday, Cotham was one of three Democrats whose absence allowed Republicans to override one of Cooper’s vetoes for the first time in years. The successful override will result in a loosening of North Carolina’s gun laws. Cotham said in a statement that she missed the vote because she was in the hospital receiving treatment for long COVID but is opposed to the pistol permit repeal.

Stefania Arteaga, co-executive director of Carolina Migrant Network, pointed out that Mecklenburg County voters overwhelmingly rejected cooperation with ICE when they elected McFadden in 2018 and 2022.

“We are outraged by Rep. Cotham’s decision to vote in favor of HB 10,” Arteaga said. “Her decision to vote in favor of the bill is a slap in the face to voters, students and families who have seen up close how collaboration between sheriffs and ICE harms our community and makes us less safe due to fear of deportation.”

Why did Cotham vote for a bill that could potentially harm her constituents or their families? Why did she vote for a bill that her county’s sheriff does not support? If she isn’t representing them, then who is she representing?

Cotham did not respond to multiple requests for comment asking why she voted for the bill. But elected officials are meant to be held accountable, and at the very least, she owes her constituents an explanation.

Paige Masten is a Charlotte-based opinion writer and member of the Editorial Board.