Musings on Immigration

The Supreme Court issued its decision in Arizona v. United States, in a resounding defeat for the anti-immigration movement, the Court affirmatively stated that three of the four provisions in question are PREEMPTED by Federal law, and most importantly that the show me your papers provision must be NARROWLY construed and enforced in order for it to remain constitutional, essentially inviting further challenges should there be any hint of racial profiling in its enforcement. In order to enforce a show me your papers provisions, the State would have to check the immigration status of EVERY person, in EVERY stop, for EVERY crime, EVERY time. Short of doing this, racial profiling will occur, since there could be NO legitimate way to determine someones immigration status. Especially since the Supreme Court struck down the provision that that barred the Arizona from stopping people because they had a reasonable cause to believe they were undocumented. This is a KEY part of the HB 87, Se...

Recently the Alabama Attorney General called on the Alabama State Legislature to repeal parts of Alabama's horrid anti-immigration law ( HB 56), because of the "unintended" consequences of the bill (frankly, what happened was not unintended). Because of the similarity between the two laws, Georgia's Speaker of the House, David Ralston was asked whether Georgia Legislature would repeal part or all of HB 87, Georgia own anti-immigration law. HB 87 has caused almost a half a billion dollars in damage to the Georgia economy (along with untold suffering in Georgia's immigrant communities) without any noted or reported positive effect. Speaker Ralston plainly stated that the Georgia Legislature would NOT do anything to repeal HB 87 . While it understandable why a politician would not admit that a pet bill he shepherded and pushed through the state legislature was simply bad law, it is also clear that Speaker Ralston is facing a challenge on his RIGHT in th...

The Georgia Attorney General just issued his Secure and Verifiable Document List , as required under HB-87, Georgia's Anti-Immigration Law. This list brings to mind the First Rule you need to know when a State passes an Anti-Immigration law. That rule is summarized in one word--"meaningless." That's right. The List, as written, is meaningless. The List changes NOTHING about Georgia law and how people can use documents in Georgia. The main reason that Rep. Matt Ramsey wanted this part of HB 87 in place was to stop the use by Mexicans of a document known as a " Matricula Consular ." The Matricula Consular is a secure document, issued after a lengthy process of identification verification by the Mexican Consulate. It is certainly as secure as a Georgia Driver's license. But, since it gave the impression, apparently, to Rep. Ramsey that people were using a Mexican ID documents to apply for benefits in the U.S. for their US Citizen children, he wanted it done...

It appears that the two Georgia Republican sponsors of the Arizona Copycat Legislation, HB 87, have backed out of an appearance with two Democratic opponents to this job-killing bill on Wednesday, March 23 at the Georgia State University Law School. The focus of this particular debate was to be the cost of HB 87, something these Republicans have refused to acknowledge or discuss. In fact, when I directly asked them this question during my testimony at the Judiciary Committee hearing in the House last month, all I received back were blank stares. On Wednesday, March 23, 2011, this event was planned: On Wednesday, March 23, 2011 from 5:30 to 6:45 pm , four lawmakers from the GA General Assembly will come to GSU College of Law for an event entitled "Can Georgia Afford It? The Costs of Passing Immigration Laws at the State Level." ** The event will cover HB 87 , also known as the “Illegal Immigration Reform and Enforcement Act of 2011.” This bill is the subject of much ...

Much has been made recently of the Utah Legislature's efforts in regards to passing a "balanced' immigration bill. Specifically balancing the hatred and bias of an Arizona "style" immigration enforcement bill, with a bill which purports to grant legal status to undocumented people and creates a temporary worker program. The impact of this legislation just hit home here in Georgia. A client just came into my office to ask about getting the "Utah Green Card." This is exactly what I was afraid of when I talked with the folks in Utah about the proposal they were formulating to counter the anti-immigration legislation that was enjoying so much publicity. The Utah legislature has created a myth, a myth that will only grow bigger as rumors of the "Utah Green Card" circulate in all immigrant communities around the U.S. What does this mean for immigrants and for Utah? I have no doubt that if the Governor of Utah signs this legislation that a LOT o...

Dear Speaker Ralston: Likely coming up for a vote this week is HB 87, a piece of legislation entitled the "Illegal Immigration Reform and Enforcement Act of 2011." This bill is misnamed, as it does not reform illegal immigration and it does not increase or better enforcement against illegal immigration over current state and federal law. I strongly urge you to table this legislation until the sponsors of this legislation comply with state law and provide a Fiscal Note for this legislation, and even more importantly, provide their fellow legislators the factual basis for the onerous, tax increasing, unconstitutional, and economy destroying provisions in this bill. I understand that the Georgia Legislature believes it must do “something” on immigration in this session. But “something” need not be legislation that destroys Georgia’s image as a welcoming state, that impedes our state’s ability to attract foreign investment, increases the burden on local go...

I have been thinking a great deal recently about all of these state immigration bills proliferating around the United States, and the direct affront that many of them are to the U.S. Constitution. I wonder, do you violate your oath of office as an elected official, whether it be at the local or state level, if you advocate for and work to pass a bill that you know is unconstitutional? We are not talking about just advocating for a change of law within the parameters of the Constitution, but rather actively working to subvert the Constitution and Constitutional principles. For example, a state senate committee from Arizona's state legislature recently approved a bill . . . that would deny automatic citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants , a measure designed to set up a possible U.S. Supreme Court case on the issue. [...] Sponsors of the automatic citizenship bill approved by the Senate panel hope it will prompt a court interpretation on an element of the 14th Amendmen...