SAN DIEGO -- It was just after 9 p.m. April 27 when Border Patrol Agent Jamie Renteria spotted 18 people walking north from the fence that marks the international border between the U.S. and Mexico in an area called Goat Canyon.
Within a few minutes, Renteria had arrested all of them -- 13 from Honduras, one from Guatemala, one from Mexico and three from India. A few hours earlier, a second, smaller group of seven was arrested by another agent not too far away.
The arrests were not unusual for a Friday night at the border. But after the arrests, which came as a caravan of Central Americans arrived at the border in Tijuana, a legal battle has been shaping up in San Diego's federal court.
At issue is the claim from 11 people facing charges of illegal entry into the U.S., typically a routine misdemeanor charge, that they are being singled out for prosecution by the Justice Department because they are from Central American countries.
Lawyers for the defendants said that others arrested in the same group, such as the three from India, are not facing charges. The lawyers argue that such selective prosecution is unconstitutional -- and that it also flies in the face of President Donald Trump's administration's publicized vow of "zero tolerance" for any illegal border crossers, regardless of their native country.
The case is scheduled for a hearing this week. Federal prosecutors in court papers deny that anyone was singled out because of where they are from, but instead argue that the defendants were trying to "cut the line" of other caravan members, who were planning to seek asylum at ports of entry.
The government said that public statements by Department of Homeland Security officials and the Border Patrol warned that asylum seekers from the caravan would be accepted -- but those trying to sneak in illegally would be prosecuted.
Defense lawyers want the charges dismissed.
To bolster their case, they point to public statements from the administration -- Twitter posts from Trump and a series of statements from Attorney General Jeff Sessions -- that they say show a specific targeting of Central Americans.
"The government cannot choose its defendants based on their alleged country of citizenship, but that's exactly what it did here," Eric Fish, a federal public defender, argued in court papers on behalf of one of his clients, Olga George. The Honduran woman arrived at the border with her four children, seeking asylum, Fish said.
Government lawyers countered that the prosecutions were not selective but were targeted at people who illegally entered the country and then claimed asylum. That was unfair to caravan members who waited, many for days, to apply for asylum at the port of entry. Filing charges against people who jumped the line also acted as a deterrent, lawyers argued.
The three Indian men who were caught with George were not prosecuted because they were not members of the caravan, the government contends.
"A prosecution of the Indian nationals offers no pointed deterrence toward the hundreds of caravan members assembled near the port of entry," Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael Lasater wrote.
In addition, he noted that one non-Central American caught with George, a Mexican man, was also prosecuted, which the government argues undercuts the claim of selective prosecution.
A Section on 05/20/2018