Law enforcement in Colorado faces legal and ethical scrutiny after a deputy allegedly shared information with federal immigration agents, violating a new state law aimed at curbing local cooperation with federal immigration enforcement. Alexander Zwinck, a Mesa County Sheriff’s Deputy, is at the center of a lawsuit that could result in a $50,000 fine, according to the Colorado Attorney General’s Office. The case highlights the complexities of balancing public safety concerns with the enforcement of immigration policies at the local level.
The incident began on June 5 when Zwinck stopped Caroline Dias-Goncalves, a 19-year-old Brazilian nursing student, for allegedly driving too close to a semi-truck. After a brief traffic stop, Dias-Goncalves was released with a warning, but federal immigration agents later stopped her and arrested her for an expired visa. The arrest sparked a disciplinary review within the Mesa County Sheriff’s Office, which found that the deputies had improperly shared information with federal immigration officers on a drug task force. Zwinck was placed on unpaid leave and removed from the task force, while colleague Erik Olson received a similarly limited suspension.
Mesa County Sheriff Todd Rowell condemned the actions of his deputies, stating that the sheriff’s office should not have been involved in the chain of events leading to Dias-Goncalves’s detention. He acknowledged that the department had crossed lines in its collaboration with federal immigration authorities and issued an apology to the student. Rowell emphasized his commitment to public safety but noted that the incident exposed flaws in the current approach to law enforcement cooperation. “I have pushed for collaboration with state and federal partners to solve crime in our community,” he said, “but this incident shows that those lines of collaboration were crossed.”
Colorado Governor Jared Polis signed the law in question earlier this year, which restricts local law enforcement from sharing immigration information with federal authorities unless specifically requested in a criminal investigation. The law has been a contentious issue, with critics arguing that it undermines public safety by limiting the ability of local officers to address crimes committed by undocumented individuals. Kristi Burton Brown, executive vice president of Advance Colorado, criticized the law, stating that the absolute ban on reporting undocumented individuals to ICE—including repeat felons—could put communities at risk. “This law doesn’t protect public safety; it protects political interests,” she said.
The controversy has drawn attention from state legislators and national political figures, including Rep. Gabe Evans, R-Colo., a former police officer who criticized the state’s sanctuary laws for prioritizing political agendas over public safety. Evans accused the state of “handcuffing cops instead of criminals” and argued that the laws have made it more difficult to address serious crimes. His comments reflect a broader national debate over immigration enforcement and the role of state and local governments in policing federal immigration laws.
The legal battle over the deputies’ actions has also raised questions about the effectiveness of state laws in preventing unauthorized collaboration with federal immigration authorities. While the lawsuit is a civil case, it underscores the potential consequences for officers who share information with federal agents. Legal experts suggest that the case could set a precedent for how similar incidents are handled in other states, particularly as immigration enforcement remains a hot-button issue in the U.S.
As the legal and administrative processes unfold, the incident serves as a cautionary tale about the risks of overstepping legal boundaries in law enforcement. It also highlights the ongoing tensions between state and federal authorities on immigration policy and the challenges of maintaining balance between public safety, legal compliance, and community trust in law enforcement.