AB 1537 awaits Newsom’s signature as Santa Ana moves further with citywide ICE work ban

As California lawmakers moved in August to prohibit peace officers statewide from taking side jobs involving federal immigration enforcement, Santa Ana was preparing to take a broader approach.

The Santa Ana City Council voted 7-0 Tuesday to introduce an ordinance prohibiting all city employees from taking outside employment involving civil immigration enforcement, including work performed for or on behalf of federal immigration agencies or private contractors assisting with that work.

A second reading of the ordinance is scheduled for Oct. 6.

See the ordinance here.

The policy builds on action the Council took in May, when it approved an ordinance aimed specifically at preventing Santa Ana Police Department officers from moonlighting in federal immigration enforcement.

During that meeting, several public speakers argued that limiting the prohibition to police officers did not go far enough and urged the Council to extend the restriction to all city employees.

Councilmembers approved the officer-focused ordinance and directed city staff to return with a separate measure covering the broader municipal workforce. That expanded ordinance returned Tuesday and passed unanimously.

Under the new ordinance, prohibited outside work can include investigating, arresting, detaining, transporting or deporting people as part of federal civil immigration enforcement.

City officials have said such work could create actual or perceived conflicts of interest, divided loyalties between city responsibilities and outside employment, and concerns over public trust.

Santa Ana’s action comes alongside Assembly Bill 1537, known as the No Side Jobs for ICE Act, which would prohibit certain California peace officers from taking secondary employment involving federal or out-of-state immigration enforcement.

The Legislature has passed AB 1537 and sent it to Gov. Gavin Newsom, who has until Sept. 30 to act on the measure. Newsom can sign or veto the bill. If he takes no action by the deadline, the bill would become law without his signature.

The legislature's bill would apply to peace officers statewide, while Santa Ana’s ordinance extends the restriction to city employees generally, including Santa Ana police officers.

Assemblymember Avelino Valencia, whose district includes Santa Ana, did not cast a vote on AB 1537 when the measure came before the Assembly.

His spokesperson, Eric Lopez, said Valencia supports the bill’s underlying goal but had concerns about how broadly the legislation was written.

“The Assemblymember did not cast a vote on AB 1537,” Lopez said in a statement. “As written, the bill does not define secondary employment but it bans ‘any’ without thoughtfully recognizing that officers work multi-year federal investigations. This includes combating some of the most heinous crimes such as child exploitation, human trafficking, narcotics, and organized crime.”

Lopez said the concern is that officers participating in federal investigations may not always know whether an assignment falls within the bill’s restrictions.

“Because the bill leaves terms undefined, an officer cannot tell in advance whether an assigned [assignment] is covered,” Lopez said. “The Assemblymember agrees that California peace officers should not be doing federal immigration enforcement on the side. Unfortunately, as written, this bill does not draw that line clearly enough for officers to follow or for the state to enforce.”

State Sen. Tom Umberg, who is also a candidate for District 4 of the State Board of Equalization, also did not cast a vote on AB 1537. His office did not respond to a request for comment.

Doesn't this violate federal law?

Critics may argue that Santa Ana is overstepping by restricting employees from taking otherwise lawful federal work. But California law allows local governments to regulate outside employment when it is considered incompatible with an employee’s duties or with the responsibilities of the agency.

Government Code § 1126 specifically permits cities to prohibit compensated outside activities that are “inconsistent, incompatible, in conflict with, or inimical to” public employment.

The ordinance also does not prevent ICE from carrying out federal immigration enforcement in Santa Ana. Courts have distinguished between a local government declining to assist federal immigration authorities and actively interfering with federal enforcement. In litigation over California’s sanctuary laws, courts have recognized that refusing to provide state or local resources is not the same as obstructing federal officers.