ll.S.

/)('partOll'lIt of HUIll(>land S;"'udlj

4.'5 I 'itrCl'L 1\ W
Wa:,llIl1gtoll. DC ~'(J',6

U.S. Immigration
and Customs
Enforceluent

March 13,2009

CASA de Maryland
734 University Boulevard E
Silver Spring, MD 20903

Re: FOIA Request Number 08-4136

Dear :

This letter is the third supplement to our November 21,2008 response to your Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) request to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). You have
requested copies of the following documents:

1. The investigation, arrest and detention of approximately 24 individuals in the City of

Baltimore, Maryland, in or near the 7-Eleven parking lot on or near the corner of Broadway
and Lombard Street, on or about January 23,2007;
2. Any communication relating to the January 23, 2007 enforcement action in Baltimore,
Maryland, before, during or after the action occurred, trom or to any office or employee of
Immigration and Customs Enforcement ("ICE");
3. Any investigation of the January 23,2007 operation and/or arrests, and/or the agents
involved, induding, but not limited to, any records in the possession or control of various
fCE offices;
4. Any and all records mentioning "day laborer", "day laborers", "day-laborer", "day-laborers",
"day labor", "hiring spot", "migrant worker", "immigrant worker", "alien worker", "7-11 ",
"7-Eleven", "seven-eleven", and "worker center;"

In addition, you are also seeking disclosure of all records created from January 1,2003 to the present
relating to the following:

5. The June 2003 Department of Justice ("DOJ") document entitled. "Guidance Regarding the
Use of Race by Federal Law Ent{)rcement Agencies" ("DOJ Guidance");
6. The .Iune 2004 Department of Homeland Security ("DHS") document entitled. "The
Department of Homeland Security's Commitment to Race Neutrality in Law Enforcement
Activities: and
7. Any and all complaints received by the ICE Office of Protessional Responsibility (,'OPR")
for any activity involving ICE agents that allegedly or actually occurred at least in part in the
state of Maryland; as well as any analysis, interviews, memoranda, recommendations, and
any other document created or received by the OPR relating to any investigation of ICE
conduct, alleged or real, that occurred at least in part within the state of Maryland; as well as
any records relating to the outcome of any such investigation.
Your request was received in this office on September 22,2008.

On November 21,2008, we responded to your request and notified you that a search of the ICE
Office of Detention and Removal Operations (ORO), the ICE Office of Investigations (01) and the
ICE Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) had located 211 pages responsive to your request.
Of those pages, 39 were released to you in their entirety. Portions of 109 pages were withheld
pursuant to FOIA Exemptions 2(1ow), 5, 6 and 7(C). Finally, 63 pages were withheld in full
pursuant to FOIA Exemptions 2(low), 5,6 and 7(C).

On February 2, 2009, we provided a supplement to our first response and notified you that a search
of the ICE Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) and the ICE Office of Detention and
Removal Operations (ORO) had located 365 pages and two videos responsive to item 3 of your
request. Of those pages, portions of 29 pages were withheld pursuant to FOIA Exemptions 2(low),
5,6 and 7(C). We notified you that we were continuing to process the balance of the records and
would address those records in a subsequent response to you.

On February 2009, we notified you that we had completed the review of 37 pages. Portions of
those pages were withheld pursuant to FOIA Exemptions 2(1ow), 2(high), 6, 7(C) and 7(E).

We have completed review of an additional 292 pages. After review, I have dctennined that
portions of those pages will be withheld pursuant to FOIA Exemptions 2(1ow), 2(high), 5, 6, 7(C)
and 7(E).

The ICE FOJA Office is currently processing the balance of the records located in response to item 3
of your request. Once those records are processed, we will address them in a subsequent response to
you.

Portions of 292 pages have been withheld as described below.

FOIA Exemption 2(Iow) protects infonnation applicable to internal administrative personnel

matters to the extent that the infonnation is of a relatively trivial nature and there is no public interest
in the document.

FOIA Exemption 2(high) protects infornlation applicable to internal administrative and personnel
matters, such as operating rules, guidelines, and manual of procedures of examiners or adjudicators,
to the extent that disclosure would risk circumvention of an agency regulation or statute, impede the
effecti veness of an agency's activities, or reveal sensitive infonnation that may put the security and
safety of an agency activity or employee at risk. Whether there is any public interest in disclosure is
legally irrelevant. Rather, the concern under high 2 is that a FOIA disclosure should not benefit
those attempting to violate the law and avoid detection.

FOIA Exemption 5 protects from disclosure those inter- or intra-agency documents that are
nonnally privileged in the civil discovery context. The three most frequently invoked privileges are
the deliberative process privilege, the attorney work-product privilege, and the attorney-client
privilege. After carefully reviewing the responsive documents, I detennined that portions ofthe
responsive documents qualify for protection under the attorney-client privilege.

WWW.lce.gOY
The attorney-client privilege protects confidential communications between an attorney and his
client relating to a legal matter tor which the client has sought professional advice. It applies to
facts divulged by a client to his attorney, and encompasses any opinions given by an attorney to his
client based upon, and thus retlecting, those facts, as well as communications between attorneys that
reflect client-supplied information. The attorney-client privilege is not limited to the context of
litigation.

FOIA Exemption 6 exempts from disclosure personnel or medical files and similar files the release
of which would cause a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. This requires a balancing
ofthe public's right to disclosure against the individual's right privacy. The types of documents
and/or inf<mnation that we have withheld may consist of social security numbers, home addresses,
dates of birth, or various other documents and/or infom1ation belonging to a third party that are
considered personal. The privacy interests of the individuals in the records you have requested
outweigh any minimal public interest in disclosure of the inforn1ation. Any private interest you may
have in that information does not factor into the aforementioned balancing test.

FOIA Exemption 7(C) protects records or intormation compiled f()r law enforcement purposes that
could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. This
exemption takes particular note of the strong interests of individuals, whether they are suspects,
witnesses, or investigators. in not being unwarrantably associated with alleged criminal activity.
That interest extends to persons who are not only the subjects of the investigation, but those who
may have their privacy invaded by having their identities and intorn1ation about them revealed in
connection with an investigation. Based upon the traditional recognition of strong privacy interest in
law entorcement records, categorical withholding of infonnation that identifies third parties in law
enforcement records is ordinarily appropriate. As such, I have detem1ined that the privacy interest in
the identities of individuals in the records you have requested clearly outweigh any minimal public
interest in disclosure of the information. Please note that any private interest you may have in that
infonnation does not factor into this detennination.

FOIA Exemption 7(E) protects records compiled for law enforcement purposes, the release of
which would disclose techniques and/or procedures tor law enforcement investigations or
prosecutions, or would disclose guidelines tor law enforcement investigations or prosecutions if such
disclosure could reasonably be expected to risk circumvention of the law. I have determined that
disclosure oflaw enforcement techniques and procedures related to fugitive operations could
reasonably be expected to risk circumvention of the law. Additionally, the techniques and
procedures at issue are not well known to the pUblic.

If you need to contact our otTice about this matter, please refer to case number 08-FOIA-4136. This
office can be reached at (202) 732-0300 or (866) 633-1182.

Sincerely,

~~Krenan
FOIA Officer

www,lcc.gO\'