People need to do time for this.

Well actually.... transient accommodations, which includes hotels and motels, do have a legal obligation to keep the details of customers private, unless there is a police inquiry, warrant or such. Private businesses can't voluntarily share anything, and those who do will be closed, their owners imprisoned. AG Ferguson is demonstrating what a nation of laws might look like.

It seems safe to assume that ICE was implying all sorts of trouble - possibly up to arrest for hindering their investigations - if the employees didn't provide the information they wanted. Maybe managers know this point of the law, but again, I can see how ICE would be sure to do their homework first, to maximize the chances of successfully twisting arms for this information.

@7

No doubt. But I would imagine that hotel operators would have lawyers and would know that they should refer ICE to them.

@6 You claim that hotels, as privately run businesses, are not allowed to voluntarily share their guests’ information with government officials, or they will be closed and their owners “imprisoned.” But how can this be reconciled with the recently passed Seattle law that demands hotel owners provide the names and information of guests who are accused of sexual harassment? This law seems at least as problematic from a privacy/due process standpoint, considering that it is mandatory, not voluntary, effectively commandeering hotels to become agents of the State, and it also requires hotels to put the accused guests on a “blacklist” without any due process procedure to be removed if the accusations are false. I’m all for Ferguson’s action here, but let’s remember that this is not the only situations where hotels are turning over guests’ names and information based on mere suspicions/unproven allegations.

@4 if I'm reading the article correctly, it wasn't just the 6 detainees that had their information given to ice. It is concerning if they are just supplying lists with no cause to believe someone is an illegal immigrant.

"But how can that be reconciled etc." -- let's pretend you're a lawyer and you've been hired to make an argument that 1) the Motel 6 actions are unlawful, AND 2) the Seattle law is enforceable. You're a lawyer, what's your argument? Let's see it.

(If you say no argument exists you are a bad imaginary lawyer.)

From what I understand, Motel 6 was acting in the mode of Sheriff Arpaio -- forwarding names of guests with Hispanic surnames. Otherwise known as profiling. Based on name, not something of substance.

Damn you, Exporter in Chief!

Wait. This started in 2015? Oh. It happened under President Obama’s watch? I guess that was ok because Democrats are friends to Hispanics. I guess. Right?