Immigration Reform
Police Forum Recommends Limitations on Investigating Immigration Status
The role of local police in immigration enforcement continues to be a complex policy and legislative issue at both the state and federal level. State legislatures, for example, are contemplating bills designed to increase the role of local police in immigration enforcement while federal legislation targets cities with so-called “sanctuary policies.” And as programs like 287(g), Secure Communities and other federal/local partnerships continue to expand, local police are now more involved in identifying undocumented immigrants than ever before. Many law enforcement officers, however, find that enforcing federal immigration law may interfere with their ability to prevent crime and keep neighborhoods safe, so they have designed tailored local policies to ensure that they maintain the best possible relationship with their communities. In a new report by the Police Executive Research Forum (PERF), local police speak out on the difficulties of enforcing immigration laws and talk about best practices for navigating immigration issues in the future. Read More
Is Utah’s “Immigration Solution” All It’s Cracked Up To Be?
Late Friday night, the Utah Legislature passed three immigration-related bills that now go to the Governor for his signature or veto in the coming week. While some may be quick to celebrate Utah’s unique approach to immigration, others are left wondering whether these bills are all they’re cracked up to be. The first measure (HB 497) is an SB1070-inspired immigration enforcement bill that would go into effect in early May if signed by the Governor. It presents many of the same concerns people had about Arizona’s SB1070—that it would allow local police to enforce federal immigration laws to the detriment of public safety, rack up high implementation costs, threaten racial profiling, and damage the state’s reputation. Read More
States Playing with Enforcement-Only Fire Likely to Get Burned
The steady drumbeat of protest continued this week in states considering restrictive immigration measures. Indiana, for example, got a taste of forthcoming economic backlash when two organizations threatened to pull conventions from the state if enforcement legislation passed—a costly lesson Arizona knows well. Legislators in other states considering similar measures—Nebraska, Michigan, Arizona and Alabama—also heard from concerned members of the community this week who fear the economic and social damage these measures will cause in their state. Although playing with enforcement-only immigration measures might have helped some of these state lawmakers light up their political careers, taxpayers are starting to realize that they're ultimately going to get burned. Read More
Immigrants Are Not the Cause of Minority Unemployment and Low Wages
Nativists are fond of grandstanding over the plight of minority workers in the United States. While not particularly concerned with civil-rights issues, anti-immigrant activists are quick to cast themselves as defenders of the downtrodden when they blame immigrants for the high unemployment rates and low wages that are all too common among minorities. For instance, a recent hearing of the House Immigration Policy and Enforcement Subcommittee, entitled “Making Immigration Work for American Minorities,” featured a number of nativist stalwarts who claimed to have the best interests of minorities at heart as they held immigrants responsible for virtually every socioeconomic ill to befall minority communities. However, the best available evidence indicates that immigration is not the cause of dismal employment prospects and poor wages for American minorities. Read More
Why Cutting Immigrant Integration Programs Hurts All of Us
Among the many spending cuts recently passed by the House was funding for the Office of Citizenship’s immigrant integration programs. The importance of these programs, however, cannot be overstated. Immigrants who integrate into U.S. society go on to become innovators, entrepreneurs and future job-creators. Although a new study released today by the British Council, Migration Policy Group and Immigration Policy Center ranks the U.S. nine among 31 countries in promoting full integration of legal residents (a relatively good score), cutting these programs can only hurt us in the long run. As the Senate prepares to take up the Continuing Resolution, restoring $11 million to the budget of the Office of Citizenship should be a no brainer given that this relatively small investment in the potential of aspiring Americans can pay huge dividends for the United States. Read More
Will State Legislators Continue to Pull the Plug on Restrictive Immigration Measures?
While some state lawmakers continue to tango with restrictive immigration bills this week, others pulled the plug on measures they worried were too costly or politically risky. Lawmakers in Arkansas, New Mexico and Nebraska voted down (or anticipated the failure of) measures that would restrict access to preventative medical care, tuition equity and driver’s licenses for undocumented immigrants. Others, however, in Michigan, Georgia, Indiana and Arizona continued attempts to move costly enforcement laws. But a trend emerged from the states this week, a trend that has been brewing over the last few months—lawmakers are tired of the restrictionist status quo. They—like the folks in Texas, Michigan and Utah this week—want real solutions to our immigration problems that won’t financially or morally bankrupt their state. Read More
Businesses Fear Restrictive Immigration Measures Will Drive Jobs to Other States
As Arizona-style enforcement legislation continues to work its way through state legislatures, local business and industry groups are beginning to realize just how much these laws will affect the way they do business. They fear the racial profiling often associated with laws targeting undocumented immigrants will create an unwelcoming environment in their state, limiting their ability to attract new business and potential workers. With many states facing severe budget deficits this year, business leaders across the U.S. are asking their legislators if their state can really afford to drive new business and jobs to neighboring, friendlier states. Read More
Some States “Just Say No” to Harmful Immigration Enforcement Laws
If Arizona had its own television show, the warning “don’t try this at home” would appear after every commercial break. (Cut to tumbleweeds and Arizona businesses pulling their pockets inside out) This week, some states—like Virginia, South Dakota and New Hampshire—actually heeded that warning and rejected a host of enforcement measures targeting undocumented immigrants. States like Oregon, Colorado and Maryland are even introducing progressive, common sense immigration proposals that benefit their state. That is, of course, not to say that other states like Tennessee, Oklahoma, Kansas and Arizona aren’t still pursing harmful enforcement legislation, but they do so in full light of the social and economic consequences—consequences for which Arizona and other states are still paying. Read More
President’s 2012 Budget Reveals Conflicted Priorities on Immigration
The President’s proposed FY 2012 budget for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) illustrates the Obama administration’s conflicted priorities when it comes to immigration. On the one hand, the budget increases funding for worthy causes such as immigrant integration, alternatives to detention, and civil-liberties oversight of enforcement programs. On the other hand, these funding increases are dwarfed by the size of the budget for border and interior immigration enforcement. In other words, despite some good intentions, and an effort to balance the impact of enforcement programs, ultimately the budget reflects a commitment to the enforcement-without-reform policies that have failed so miserably over the past two decades. Read More
Progressive Immigration Measures Pick Up Steam at the State Level
By SUMAN RAGHUNATHAN, PROGRESSIVE STATES NETWORK As the list of state business leaders, law enforcement, and conservative lawmakers who realize that anti-immigrant efforts are costly, misguided, and destructive to state economies continues to grow, a number of state elected officials are putting their weight behind progressive, solutions-based approaches to immigration policy. A group of progressive state elected officials affiliated with Progressive States Network—State Legislators for Progressive Immigration Policy, with members in 34 states and counting—have been at the forefront of advancing pragmatic and progressive state approaches to immigration which expand opportunities for all residents, both immigrant and native-born, while strengthening communities and state economies. Read More
Make a contribution
Make a direct impact on the lives of immigrants.
