Legislation
Arizona’s SB1070 Champion, State Senator Russell Pearce, Loses in Recall Election
Arizona state senator Russell Pearce, the leading force behind Arizona’s SB 1070 and other anti-immigrant legislation, was defeated in a recall election Tuesday. Fellow Republican Jerry Lewis—a moderate on immigration issues—won with 54% of the vote. Citing Pearce’s narrow anti-immigrant agenda and the damage SB 1070 inflicted on the state, a group called Citizens for a Better Arizona began the recall effort back in January. Today, many in Arizona and across the U.S. celebrate Pearce’s defeat as a victory for practical solutions over extremist rhetoric and anti-immigrant proposals. Pearce is believed to be the first Arizona state legislator to face a recall election. Read More
Bad for Business: How Alabama’s Anti-Immigrant Law Stifles State Economy
Although key provisions of Alabama’s HB 56 are on hold while its constitutionality is being tested in the courts, evidence is mounting of the growing fiscal and economic impact of the new law. State economic experts and business leaders agree that the law has already caused hardship for Alabama’s businesses and citizens. Read More
Provisions in Alabama’s Immigration Law Go Further Than You Think
It’s no stretch to call Alabama’s new immigration law (HB 56) extreme—especially the provision (since enjoined) which required schools to check the immigration status of students and made it a criminal misdemeanor for an unauthorized immigrant to fail to carry immigration documentation. Two provisions that may have flown under the radar, however, are the contract and business transaction which infringe on individuals’ ability to navigate everyday life (such as access to water) and leave them vulnerable to exploitation and abuse. Sadly, this is exactly what the law’s author had in mind. A new report, Turning Off the Water: How the Contracting and Transaction Provisions in Alabama's Immigration Law Make Life Harder For Everyone, analyzes just how far these provisions go. Read More
Checklist for Estimating the Costs of SB 1070-Style Legislation
(Updated November 2011) - Arizona’s infamous anti-immigrant law, SB 1070, has spawned many imitators. In a growing number of state houses around the country, bills have been passed or introduced which—like SB 1070—create new state immigration crimes and expand the power of police to enforce immigration laws. Some state laws would make E-Verify mandatory for all businesses, require schools to check students’ immigration status, or make it a crime to “harbor or transport” unauthorized immigrants. State legislators who are thinking of jumping on the immigration enforcement bandwagon, however, would be wise to consider the costs of such legislation. State immigration enforcement laws impose unfunded mandates on the police, jails, and courts; drive away workers, taxpayers, and consumers upon whom the state economy depends; and invite costly lawsuits and tourist boycotts. These are economic consequences which few states can afford at a time of gaping budget deficits. Read More
Remembering the Benefits of IRCA, 25 Years Later
Twenty five years ago this week, President Ronald Reagan signed the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA), an immigration reform bill which, despite a contentious debate, managed to pass a Republican Senate and a Democratic House. In fact, Reagan called the immigration bill one of the “most difficult legislative undertakings of recent memory” but one that “further generations of Americans” would “be thankful for.” And Reagan wasn’t wrong. Despite criticisms from both restrictionists and advocates that IRCA failed to address future waves of immigration, the benefits of IRCA—as well as the bipartisan support needed to pass it—should give our current congressional leaders something to think about. Read More
Congressional Members to Join Civil Rights Groups in Fight Against Alabama’s “Juan Crow” Law
In the days following passage of Alabama’s extreme immigration law (HB 56), many business, religious and civil rights leaders spoke out about the law’s damaging impact on immigrant communities, farms, businesses, and schools. Since then, many notable community and civil rights leaders have stepped forward to add their voice to those demanding a repeal of the law. The Alabama NAACP, for example, recently joined immigrant rights groups to call for an end to what one African American minister described as “Alabama’s worst times since the days of segregation and Jim Crow.” This week, Illinois Congressman Luis Gutierrez met with members of several congressional caucuses—Hispanic, Black, Asian Pacific American and Progressive—to address what he calls Alabama’s “civil rights emergency.” Read More
DOJ’s Lawsuit Against South Carolina Latest Legal Challenge to State Immigration Laws
BY KAREN TUMLIN, MANAGING ATTORNEY, NATIONAL IMMIGRATION LAW CENTER Yesterday, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) filed suit against South Carolina, challenging the state’s extreme anti-immigration law (SB 20). With this action, the Department of Justice charges that South Carolina, like Arizona and Alabama, have passed unconstitutional immigration laws. Civil rights groups (including the National Immigration Law Center) agree. Coalitions have filed suit in five states—Utah, Indiana, Georgia, Alabama, and South Carolina—that passed their own Arizona-inspired laws in 2011. Fortunately, most of these states have seen their new, misguided laws lose much of their bite through civil rights coalition-led legal challenges. Here’s a round-up of the status of these legal cases. Read More
Alabama Law Enforcement, Courts Implementing New Law in Different Ways Across State
As if things weren’t chaotic enough in Alabama, reports now find that law enforcement and courts vary widely on how they apply the state's new immigration law, creating different rules and consequences for individuals depending on a judge or officer’s understanding of the law. As the controversial law (HB 56) itself continues to change as it makes its way through the court system, many law enforcement officers are unclear about which provisions still stand and have yet to receive the training necessary to implement the law. Judges, too, are on different pages on how to interpret the law, meaning that an individual might receive a different ruling from one judge to the next depending on the judge's understanding of the law. Read More
A Small Step Toward Reform: Bipartisan Bill Seeks to Raise Per Country Immigration Caps
An immigration bill introduced by Congressmen Lamar Smith and Jason Chaffetz and supported by Democrats may actually have a chance at passing in Congress. Scheduled for a mark up this week, the bill (H.R. 3012) would make small but significant changes to the way green cards are distributed by eliminating per country numerical limits on employment-based green cards and raising the limits on family-based green cards which go to immigrants from each country. Read More
Why Arizona Governor Jan Brewer is Bluffing on State Immigration Laws
Arizona Governor Jan Brewer has built a political career out of playing fast and loose with the facts about immigrants—from stories of “headless bodies” in the desert to mischaracterizing all unauthorized immigrants as “drug mules.” And she’s not finished yet. Following a recent GOP Presidential debate, Gov. Brewer overplayed her hand by assuring the Huffington Post that unauthorized immigrants fleeing Alabama are “probably going back to Mexico” and that Alabama farmers will “probably find the U.S. workers” they need to replace them. If you think Governor Brewer is “probably” bluffing, you’re “probably” right. Read More
Make a contribution
Make a direct impact on the lives of immigrants.
