Lakewood has reason to be concerned about being placed on the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) list of sanctuary cities. Email records show they do not comply with federal immigration law, nor do they plan to. Sanctuary was not granted through official vote of City Council; however, sanctuary from federal immigration law was undertaken behind the scenes while using word games to muddy the issue. From the emails, it appears that some Lakewood City Council Members do not appear to know the full extent of Lakewood’s defiance of federal law. On the other hand, DHS knows more than is publicly apparent – which makes sense because they are the ones that have been stonewalled for years. So although Lakewood does not pay for migrant support, it is clear that there is good reason for Lakewood to be placed on a sanctuary list, no matter the word games Lakewood plays.
Lakewood City Council has repeatedly denied being a sanctuary city – which is true if defined by formal vote. However, it is not true that Lakewood does not provide sanctuary for illegals. Lakewood DOES provide sanctuary by not verifying immigration status or cooperating with DHS.
In the beginning of the sanctuary city debate, the general public understood that a sanctuary city was just that – a safe place where your immigration status wouldn’t be questioned or held against you. Lakewood never made a public motion or official policy stating that they are a sanctuary city but it is apparent that they fully embrace and enable the state’s sanctuary status rather than federal immigration enforcement.
No emails asking for removal
When Lakewood was placed on the sanctuary city list, Lakewood did not issue a denial. There are no emails to DHS asking to be removed. That would be the first, honest, response from a city that was NOT acting as a sanctuary and was complying with federal immigration law. That’s what Aurora did. There is no email evidence that occurred in Lakewood. There are no emails asking why Lakewood is on the list. This is despite the fact that there is email from Senator Bennet’s office showing that jurisdictions with questions should reach out via email to SanctuaryJurisdictions@hq.dhs.gov.
The official response to City Council was a bland email stating that Lakewood staff didn’t know why they were on the list or that they were concerned.
Again, parsing the words carefully, staff “didn’t know why they were on the list” is different than “we have no idea why we are on the list.” Lakewood management may not have known the exact reason DHS was citing, but Lakewood would have known what internal procedural changes have been made over the years. Or perhaps Lakewood assumed they wouldn’t be singled out from other cities in Colorado who may have adopted similar, pro-sanctuary polices. Probably, they could rely on not having an official vote cast for sanctuary, which appears to be the case for some Councilors.
Someone must have known there is a reason to be concerned, or they would have asked questions openly and honestly. Instead, Lakewood proceeded by investigating “delicately” (see email below).
Lakewood declined to comment to the Denver Gazette and Denver 7 inquiries. A quick Google search could find no comment in any press coverage on the subject although Mayor Strom did reply to an msn.com inquiry.
Official Response to City Council
Don’t Draw Attention to Sanctuary Policies
Nowhere anywhere did our investigation turn up evidence that Lakewood cooperates with DHS and ICE on immigration matters. There was never a suggestion that the situation was a misunderstanding. There was no proof emailed to DHS that Lakewood is indeed cooperating with federal immigration. There was one email showing that a Lakewood employee signed up for e-verify for the first time on Monday, June 2, in what may be a coincidence or a panicked response.
In this case, Lakewood appears to have taken the approach that the less said the better because Lakewood cooperates with state law. Colorado sanctuary law is obviously intended to conflict with federal law. Lakewood’s cooperation with the state may be seen in multiple subversive actions, rather than one blanket vote by city council for “sanctuary”.
And in fact, Ben Goldstein wrote: “Overall, I think the best strategy is to keep our heads down on this one, but perhaps the cat is out of the bag now” (see below).
Lakewood Does Not Cooperate With Federal Immigration
Proof that Lakewood provides sanctuary by not cooperating with DHS is shown in several ways besides being unable to deny the charge:
- Lakewood insists that complying with Colorado’s sanctuary law is federally legal
- Does not use DHS database to identify people
- Lakewood will not certify that it cooperates with DHS policies
- Slow response to DHS request
There are also a couple things conspicuously missing:
- Email communications to DHS regarding the situation.
- Emails with explanations from City Manager Kathy Hodgson
- An official denial that Lakewood is a sanctuary
- Evidence that Lakewood is willing to comply with federal immigration law
Complying with Colorado Law Over Federal Law
As one example of City Council opinions, Councilor Jacob LaBure believes being placed on the sanctuary city list is “baseless” (see email below). LaBure’s response is the strong denial of an innocent man – which stands in stark contrast to the “keep your head down approach” from Lakewood management. However, strong beliefs or rewriting definitions of sanctuary does not change Lakewood’s support of migrant polices in 2024 or Lakewood’s vote to help Denver with its influx of migrants or Lakewood’s policy to lessen migrants deportation fears. As previously reported, such support is the original definition of a sanctuary city.
In 2024 Lakewood Informer filed CORAs regarding immigration policy and did not receive any answers as to enforcement actions. The responding supervisor said the public information officer would be reaching out – an action that didn’t happen. Verbal responses in public meetings align with Jeffco’s response. They say that checking immigration status, which used to be a routine practice, was not the job of local jurisdictions. There is no federal law that says a home rule police department must check immigration status. This was just a matter of routine, like checking to see if you had an out-of-state drivers license. Lakewood no longer regularly does these routine checks.
No Use of DHS Database
Colorado law requires Lakewood to NOT share personally identifiable information with DHS non-public databases. However, that’s the primary way of enforcing overriding federal immigration law. NOT accessing federal databases is also harmful to local police who are trying to solve crimes.
One email shows Lakewood police working through Aurora to get a person identified through the DHS database. Aurora successfully argued their case to get dropped from the sanctuary city list, perhaps because of proof like their ability to use the DHS database. It appears that without Aurora’s connection, Lakewood would be unable to identify the person involved in a shooting in Lakewood. Shootings are still a priority crime in Lakewood to be investigated, unlike many others that have been de-prioritized such as having drug paraphernalia. Coordination and cooperation with other agencies is a two-way street.
Remember that the DHS list of sanctuaries was removed because local governments accused the federal government of a breach in trust by not being consulted in the compilation of the list. These developments raise the question of if the federal government was consulted when local governments decided not to cooperate and if that was a breach of trust.
Will Not Certify Cooperation with DHS
Both state and federal grants now include clauses that Lakewood will not share data with DHS databases (Colorado) or that it will (federal). That stipulation illuminates the conflict with state and federal sanctuary polices.
Grants requiring cooperation with immigration enforcement are now problematic for Lakewood. Federal cooperation includes identifying aliens and holding them for ICE removal, both of which used to be standard practice but no longer take place.
Lakewood could previously apply for both sets of funds under the legal theory that there was no conflict. Now that legal theory is in jeopardy. As a result, Lakewood police staff have been advised to “be cautious” of any immigration enforcement or DEI certification language and not to apply for new grants unless essential.
Lakewood Slow to Respond to DHS Request
DHS reached out to help with immigration issues in March. From the emails it appears he repeated the request on May 28, the day before the DHS list was published. Lakewood Police would have to investigate such rumors for proof, which is outside their mandate but this may have been a test.
It is also apparent that DHS regularly emails for help and coordination. It is not clear whether Lakewood responds, which would require further investigation.
It is possible that a pattern of slow or non-response has been noted by DHS.
Lakewood Provides Sanctuary
The moral of the story is to not believe any statement that Lakewood is not a sanctuary city because Lakewood never formally defined such a term. That does not mean they they are in compliance with federal law. Instead, ask questions such as:
- Does Lakewood cooperate with federal immigration, or
- Does Lakewood routinely check immigration status (a 2 minute process that used to be routine)
- Does Lakewood use non-public databases containing personally identifiable information (PII).