Tennessee, District 4
The “Mass Influx” Declaration
In 1996, Congress passed a law giving the federal government the power to declare an emergency relating to a “mass influx” of migrants. When this emergency provision is enacted, the government can both disburse funding to states and localities dealing with the “influx” and delegate authority to local… Read More
Colorado’s H-2A and H-2B Workers in Fiscal Year 2021
Two new factsheets from the American Immigration Council, Colorado’s H-2A Workers in Fiscal Year 2021 and Colorado’s H-2B Workers in Fiscal Year 2021 provide data on the different steps in the H-2A and H-2B processes to inform policymakers and advocates of the demand for temporary agricultural and nonagricultural workers in the Centennial State. Read More
New Americans in Utah
This research brief highlights the key role that new Americans are playing in Utah as participants in the state’s workforce, taxpayers, consumers, entrepreneurs, international students, and more. Read More
Power of the Purse: Contributions of Hispanic Americans in Texas
New research from American Immigration Council underscores the crucial role the Hispanic population plays in Texas’ labor force, population growth, and economy. The new series of factsheets, Power of the Purse: Contributions of Hispanic Americans in Texas, were prepared in partnership with the Texas Association of… Read More
Tracking the Biden Agenda on Immigration Enforcement
This report analyzes the Biden administration's 100 days progress in reforming immigration enforcement and recommendations for how to best move forward. Read More
The Sins of the Fathers: The Children of Undocumented Immigrants Pay the Price
For the undocumented in America there is little doubt that the iniquities of the father are visited upon the child. On November 7th, for instance, an astounding 71 percent of voters in Arizona passed a referendum (Proposition 300) which states that only U.S. citizens and legal residents are eligible for in-state college tuition rates, tuition and fee waivers, and financial assistance. These are kids brought by their parents to this country as young children, in many instances infants in their mothers’ arms, and in every instance as children for whom the decision to come here was made without their participation. And yet, they shall pay the price, perhaps with their futures. The same referendum would deny childcare to the U.S.-citizen children of undocumented parents. Yes, the child is a citizen of the United States, but voters in Arizona have concluded that to provide the child with care is to reward the parents for the sin of seeking a better life in America. Read More
Bad for Business: How Anti-Immigration Legislation Drains Budgets and Damages States’ Economies
This session, state legislatures are once again considering harsh immigration-control laws. These laws are intended to make everyday life so difficult for unauthorized immigrants that they will choose to “self-deport” and return to their home countries. Proponents of these laws claim that the departure of unauthorized immigrants will save states millions of dollars and create jobs for U.S citizens. However, experience from states that have passed similar anti-immigration measures shows that the opposite can occur: the impact of the laws can hinder prospects for economic growth, and the costs of implementing, defending, and enforcing these laws can force taxpayers to pay millions of dollars. Read More
What Arizona v. United States May Mean for States with Similar Immigration Laws
In April, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments in Arizona v. United States, a case addressing the legality of the Arizona immigration law known as SB 1070. According to the statement of legislative intent, the law was designed to make “attrition through enforcement” the official policy of all state and local agencies in Arizona. Following the passage of SB 1070, numerous other states—including Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, South Carolina, and Utah—passed legislation with similar provisions, which have also been challenged in court. Read More
Q&A Guide to State Immigration Laws
What You Need to Know if Your State is Considering Anti-immigrant Legislation Updated 2012 - In April 2010, Arizona governor Jan Brewer signed the “Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act,” or, as it is commonly known, SB1070. At the time of its passage, Arizona’s immigration law surpassed all previous state immigration-control efforts. While much of the law has been enjoined by the courts, its passage inspired legislators in other states to pass similar legislation. Since SB1070 passed, 36 other states have attempted to pass harsh immigration-control laws. Of those, 31 states have rejected or refused to advance their bills. However, five states—Utah, Indiana, South Carolina, Georgia, and Alabama—have passed laws that mirror or go beyond the Arizona law. It is likely that additional states will attempt to pass similar anti-immigrant legislation during the 2012 legislative session. SB1070 and other immigration-related state legislation represent, among other things, a growing frustration with our broken immigration system. The courts will decide the constitutionality of the various laws, and time will answer many questions about their impact. In the short term, much evidence suggests that an enforcement-only strategy—whether attempted at the federal or state level—will not solve the root causes of unauthorized immigration. Read More
Discrediting “Self Deportation” as Immigration Policy
By Michele Waslin The day that Alabama’s draconian anti-immigrant law went into effect in October of 2011, thousands of school children were reported absent from schools across the state, and workers did not show up for their jobs. In recent months, many immigrants living in the state have confined themselves to their homes, fearful of driving their kids to school, getting groceries, or seeking medical attention. The Alabama State Representative behind the law, Mickey Hammon, explicitly stated that this was the law’s intended effect. He said that the law, HB56, “attacks every aspect of an illegal alien’s life” and “is designed to make it difficult for them to live here so they will deport themselves.” Alabama provides a sterling example of the devastating impact of a strategic and systematic plan being promoted by anti-immigrant groups and lawmakers who have jumped on the bandwagon. The plan is called “attrition through enforcement” (sometimes called “self deportation”) and the groups behind it have created a web of federal and state legislative proposals that seek to reduce illegal immigration by making it difficult, if not impossible, for unauthorized immigrants to live in American society. While individual proposals may appear to be relatively benign, they are part of a larger systematic plan that undermines basic human rights, devastates local economies, and places unnecessary burdens on U.S. citizens and lawful immigrants. Read More
Make a contribution
Make a direct impact on the lives of immigrants.
