S.298 (2025) to ban VT-DHS links
From: Jill Martin Diaz (they/elle)
Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2025 7:28 AM
To: ldodge@leg.state.vt.us
Subject: VAAP support for H298
Dear Representative Dodge,
Thank you for your leadership in advancing H.298. As an immigration attorney and Executive Director of the Vermont Asylum Assistance Project (VAAP), I write to offer my strong support for this bill and to provide legal context for its necessity, enforceability, and timeliness.
Every day, immigrants in Vermont must engage with local schools, courts, hospitals, and service providers. When those government institutions are perceived to participate in federal immigration enforcement, it erodes trust and endangers families. H.298 takes comprehensive, long-overdue steps to ensure that no Vermont agency becomes a funnel to deportation through default data sharing or discretionary cooperation with ICE.
What H.298 Does
H.298 builds effective firewalls by:
Limiting Interoperability: Prohibiting the use of systems that automatically share data with ICE or CBP, such as biometric and jail records systems;
Ending Civil Immigration Holds and Transfers: Preventing agencies from detaining or transferring people to ICE custody absent a judicial warrant;
Restricting Disclosure of Sensitive Information: Barring the collection or disclosure of place of birth, release dates, and other data not required to be shared by law;
Creating Enforceability: Providing a private right of action and clear complaint pathways for individuals harmed by violations.
These measures reflect best practices already adopted in other jurisdictions to protect civil liberties, uphold due process, and avoid litigation risk.
A Climate of Fear, Confusion, and Urgency
This week’s media attention around ICE’s unexplained transfer of Rumeysa Ozturk, a woman previously held in prolonged solitary confinement and subject to abusive treatment, to mysterious federal custody in Vermont, has fueled widespread fear and confusion. VAAP served as a testifying organization in her federal habeas corpus litigation (see Ozturk v. Trump, Ex. 8, ACLU of Massachusetts case page). Even without commenting on the legal merits or motives of the transfer, the impact here in Vermont has been immediate and serious.
We were already hearing directly from service providers and families that patients are missing life-or-death medical appointments due to fear of immigration enforcement. Interpreters and human service professionals are reporting that people are choosing not to drive on Vermont highways or bring their children to school out of concern that simple traffic stops could result in ICE custody. These fears are not irrational—they are rooted in lived experience of ICE activities happening right now in our state and they are exacerbated by the legal and technical opacity of how and when Vermont systems interface with ICE.
Passing H.298 is a critical step to restore public confidence. Vermonters need and deserve clear, enforceable assurances that engaging with their schools, hospitals, courts, or police will not expose them to detention or deportation.
Federal Compliance: 8 U.S.C. § 1373
Some may raise concerns about potential conflict with 8 U.S.C. § 1373, a statute that prohibits restrictions on communication with DHS about a person’s immigration or citizenship status. § 1373 prohibits state and local governments from restricting communication with DHS regarding a person's immigration or citizenship status. Courts have interpreted § 1373 narrowly—especially after the Murphy v. NCAA and City of New York v. U.S. decisions—finding that states are not required to affirmatively share information or participate in federal enforcement. Vermont is well within its rights to limit what data it collects or retains in the first place, and to decline voluntary cooperation in purely civil immigration enforcement.
H.298 is carefully drafted to comply with federal law. It does not restrict such communication where required. Instead, the bill lawfully limits the collection, retention, and disclosure of other categories of personal information—such as release dates, place of birth, or contact details—which are not subject to any federal mandate. Courts have affirmed that states are not obligated to participate in civil immigration enforcement and may restrict their agencies from doing so. H.298 falls squarely within those bounds.
Why It Matters
VAAP applauds similar efforts in the Senate with respect to the partial checks-and-balances proposed in S.44 (https://www.vaapvt.org/blog/s44) but recommends that Vermont seize the additions proposed in H.298 to address the technical interoperability and data-sharing pipelines that allow ICE to extract information without formal cooperation. H.298 is different. It draws a bright line, preventing Vermont agencies from being used as silent partners in civil immigration enforcement.
We urge the Legislature to act now. Immigrant Vermonters are watching and waiting for a sign that their state is committed to their safety, dignity, and belonging.
Thank you again for your commitment to justice and clarity. I’m available at any time to provide further legal analysis or testimony.
With gratitude,
Jill Martin Diaz, Esq.
Jill Martin Diaz, Esq. (they/them, elle/ellx - what's this?)
Executive Director, Vermont Asylum Assistance Project
Director of Legal Services, Connecting Cultures
P.O. Box 814, Elmwood Ave, Burlington, VT 05402
jill@vaapvt.org
