Immigration at the Border
Civil Rights Leaders Speak Out Against Alabama’s “Vile” Immigration Law
Late last week, thousands gathered on the steps of Alabama’s capitol building to hear civil rights leaders—Rev. Jesse Jackson, Rev. Al Sharpton, Martin Luther King III and Wade Henderson of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, among others—speak out against the state’s extreme immigration law, HB 56. Although key provisions of Alabama’s law have been enjoined by federal courts, the law still requires police to verify the immigration status of anyone stopped or arrested whom they suspect is in the country without documents. The leaders, who were also protesting a new voter ID law, called HB 56 the “most vile” law in the country. Read More
Appeals Court Blocks Two More Provisions of Alabama’s Extreme Immigration Law
The U.S Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit temporarily enjoined two more controversial provisions of Alabama’s extreme immigration law (HB 56), adding to the list of enjoined provisions. Yesterday, the 11th Circuit blocked Section 27, which bars Alabama courts from enforcing a contract with an unlawfully present person, and Section 30, which makes it a felony for an undocumented immigrant to enter into a “business contract” (including business licenses, mobile home registration and basic utilities, like water, gas, and electric services) with the state. The sections of Alabama’s law that remain in effect include the “papers please” provision, which requires law enforcement officers to determine the legal status of those when stopped or arrested whom they have reasonable suspicion to believe is in the U.S. without documents, as well as an E-Verify provision. Read More
Why the Scott Gardner Act is Unconstitutional…and a Bad Idea
Immigration hardliners never hesitate to claim the mantle of “states’ rights” when defending laws like Arizona SB 1070. But those wanting local cops to double as federal immigration agents were conspicuously silent at a congressional hearing on Wednesday on the Scott Gardner Act, a bill that (among other things) would require police to run extra background checks on foreign nationals arrested for drunk driving. Instead, it was pro-immigrant members of Congress who had to remind the legislative sponsors that the Constitution prohibits the federal government from imposing unfunded mandates on states—all while explaining the many reasons why the bill would make bad policy. Read More
Mother Jones Exposes Inner Workings of the Self-Deportation Movement
In its March/April issue, Mother Jones Magazine goes “inside the self-deportation movement,” exploring “164 state anti-immigration bills and the forces behind them.” The concept of “self deportation,” popularized by GOP presidential contender Mitt Romney, is central to the philosophy of “attrition through enforcement.” The basic idea is that, if you make life hard enough for unauthorized immigrants, they will pick up and leave of their own accord, which means the state will not have to hunt them down, detain them, and deport them. Read More
Mother Jones Exposes Inner Workings of the Self-Deportation Movement
In its March/April issue, Mother Jones Magazine goes “inside the self-deportation movement,” exploring “164 state anti-immigration bills and the forces behind them.” The concept of “self deportation,” popularized by GOP presidential contender Mitt Romney, is central to the philosophy of “attrition through enforcement.” The basic idea is that, if you make life hard enough for unauthorized immigrants, they will pick up and leave of their own accord, which means the state will not have to hunt them down, detain them, and deport them. Read More
Mother Jones Exposes Inner Workings of the Self-Deportation Movement
In its March/April issue, Mother Jones Magazine goes “inside the self-deportation movement,” exploring “164 state anti-immigration bills and the forces behind them.” The concept of “self deportation,” popularized by GOP presidential contender Mitt Romney, is central to the philosophy of “attrition through enforcement.” The basic idea is that, if you make life hard enough for unauthorized immigrants, they will pick up and leave of their own accord, which means the state will not have to hunt them down, detain them, and deport them. Read More
Court Strikes Down Provision of Fremont’s Immigration Ordinance, Impact on Community Continues
BY DARCY TROMANHAUSER, PROGRAM DIRECTOR AT NEBRASKA APPLESEED. A federal court’s recent decision to strike down the core of Fremont’s immigration enforcement ordinance (Ordinance No. 5165)—which requires businesses to verify employees’ immigration status and renters to apply for an occupancy license—is no surprise. Across the country, every immigration ordinance with a rental component has been found unconstitutional—but not before creating great cost, division, and a sense of loss in the local community. Although Fremont’s immigration measure has not yet gone into effect, its passage is having a devastating impact on the community. Read More
Despite Alabama’s Cautionary Tale, Mississippi Moves Forward with Extreme “Papers, Please” Immigration Legislation
So much for Southern hospitality. Despite damning reports, bad press and mea culpas from politicians out of Alabama following passage of their extreme immigration law, HB 56, Mississippi lawmakers continued down the same destructive path this week. Mississippi’s “papers please” immigration bill, HB 488—which contains nearly all the same provisions as Alabama’s extreme immigration law, including those previously blocked by a Federal Appeals Court—passed out of two committees this week. In addition to the “papers, please” provision, Mississippi’s law also requires every public school to determine the immigration status of every enrolling student. The law also makes it illegal for any state or local governmental entity to engage in any “business transaction” with an undocumented immigrant—potentially denying basic medical care and access to utilities to families and children. The bill now goes back to the Mississippi House for debate. Read More
ICE Distorts Facts in Debate over Immigration Detainers
February was an important month in the debate over immigration “detainers,” the controversial tool used to strong-arm local jails into holding immigrants on the federal government’s behalf. In Connecticut, a class-action lawsuit was filed attacking detainers’ many legal vulnerabilities, and the Governor announced that state jails will not honor them in all cases. In Illinois, Cook County received another pointed letter from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Director John Morton over a local ordinance enacted last year. While immigration detainers are a subject of legitimate public debate, the controversies demonstrate how ICE has resorted to making disingenuous legal claims in apparent hopes spreading the mistaken belief that immigration detainers must be honored. Read More
Make a contribution
Make a direct impact on the lives of immigrants.
