The Catch 22 of Immigration Reform
Dateline: June 28, 2010
It’s a terrible Catch-22. For years now the powers that be in Washington have done next to nothing to help define and refine the nation’s immigration laws. So states and municipalities have started to tackle the job themselves. However, when the ‘locals’ are finally exasperated enough to take action they’re hauled into court for encroaching on the federal government’s purview!
Let me get this straight. The Feds won’t act to fix our immigration mess but the states can’t do anything either because it’s the Feds’ job? Oh, what a paralyzed mess we’ve become in this country!
We’ve all heard about what Arizona did. The state’s officials showed real daring in the fight to be pro-active about identifying, prosecuting and deporting those who should never have entered America in the first place. Arizona now has the toughest anti-illegal immigrant laws in the land but they’re also mired in expensive court fights. One such suit has already reached the U.S. Supreme Court.
Fremont, Nebraska Main Street
You may also have heard that today, Monday, June 28th, people in the small town of Fremont, Nebraska vote whether to adopt a first step law to control those who are in their town illegally through regulating where they can live and work.
But you may not know that almost 40 other municipalities in 18 other states have already gone this route. That’s how intense the frustration level is in this country! Government bodies in states across the country have thrown up their hands at the lack of immigration action on Capitol Hill and have tried to tackle the job themselves.
All these local attempts started with something very basic to every human: housing. These state and city lawmakers figured if illegals found it tough to rent a place in their locality they would go somewhere else. The idea was to make landlords demand hard proof of a renter’s citizenship and to enforce strong penalties against those who rented to illegals.
Officials in these places – from Missouri, Illinois and Kansas to the Carolinas, Wisconsin and Oklahoma ultimately gave
Anti-Immigration Idea: Making Housing Hard to Get
up the idea of trying to regulate immigrants housing mostly because they feared the cost of defending their actions in court. Every time one of these localities talked about how they could legislate the problem the American Civil Liberties Union or Latino groups made it clear they would immediately file discrimination lawsuits if such laws passed.
Lawmakers in many of the 40 towns or cities also considered penalties against employers who hired non-documented workers but they gave up on that too. Again, just too expensive to defend, they explained.
All local attempts have failed. Courts across the land continue to rule that it is the job of the Federal government to pass such laws. So where the heck is Washington in all this? President after President comes and goes. Session after session of Congress opens and closes and we are no closer to any meaningful immigration law changes.
Hazleton, Pa. Mayor Lou Barletta
Remember the names Hazelton, Pennsylvania and Farmer’s Branch, Texas. Stalwart town leaders in those two locations have refused to give up – or in – to the lawsuits. Along with the state of Arizona these two towns stand as reminders to Washington that America will continue to hold their feet to the fire until they do something to right the sinking ship that is our current immigration policy.
Hazelton was the first American city to pass a local illegal immigration ordinance in 2006. The Dallas suburb of Farmer’s Branch quickly followed the same year. So far they’ve spent at least 500 thousand and 3.4 million dollars, respectively, defending their actions to protect their community. Officials in both places say they fully expect the price tag will rise by several million dollars more. But they’ve concluded that’s cheaper than paying for English as a Second Language Programs in public schools, emergency room and health care costs and the extra expense for adding more police. In Farmer’s Branch, Texas officials report since they made their intentions known to crack down on illegal
Farmer's Branch, Texas Mayor Tim O'Hare
aliens even the uninsured accident rate has plummeted.
So, when you read about citizens in little Fremont, Nebraska – population 25,000 – going to today on its immigration ordinance what will you think? Maybe that it’s just another futile attempt to pass a law several courts have already struck down.
I prefer to look at it as thousands more American voices rising up to tell Washington they are getting fed up and want action on the problem.
You know, if you paid a painter or plumber or electrician to do a job that never got done you’d ask for your money back and fire them. It’s a shame we can’t do that with our national politicians as we add immigration reform to the growing list of things they just never seem to get done.
Update: June 29, 2010 -The result of the vote? This New York Times article entitled, “Nebraska Town Votes to Banish Illegal Immigrants” tells the story. And, again I ask, IS WASHINGTON LISTENING?
{ 9 comments… read them below or add one }
ABQ Journal Reader Marcia A. Chadwick writes:
” Ms. Dimond,
Enjoyed your article (as always) in Saturday’s Albuquerque Journal – ‘Little Guys Outdo Feds on Immigration.’ There is one point mentioned that rankles me to the core, however, it could be because I do not have a full grasp of our current legal system.
If the people are here illegally – what rights do they have? Why are our courts allowing these lawsuits to even be filed by the ACLU, etc. if they are filed on behalf of people who are in our country illegally (and it does not matter what their country of origin is)? If you are illegal, you have no rights – none.
All across our nation people are screaming that their rights are being violated. But to my thinking, the only people whose rights are being violated are those who are here legally – because we are the ones paying for all the people living here illegally. And now the states and towns who have decided to stand up and fight against all the illegals, are having to face wasted time and money in the courts to fight for their right to enforce that which is a Federal law to begin with. Why are these lawsuits even being allowed to be filed?”
Dear Marcia:
Because we are a nation that was founded on the premise that everyone has equal rights.
See, I’m with you – I think our constitution was designed with CITIZENS of the United States in mind – not simply everyone in the whole wide world.
In an over simplified nutshell: As odd as it seems our judicial system is open to everyone – and then its up to individual judges to either accept a case or toss it out.
Clumsy, huh?
ABQ Journal reader Mary Yarritu writes:
“Diane, read your interesting article on immigration, and surprised that you are indignant because Washington is doing nothing about immigration reform. You have been in politics long enough to know the real reason nothing is being done. Washington is run by the corporations and they have relied on immigration labor to make money for their company and keep their shareholders happy. It is illegal to hire immigrants, yet no one enforces the law. In Las Vegas alone, if the corporations would request immigration status of their employees, the city alone would have to go “dark” because there would be no one to clean the rooms, wash the dishes, and perform lawn maintenance and do all the mundane tasks that keeps the city alive.
This cheap labor does not come free. Open borders for the last 20 years has created a financial burden to our economy. What is the government to do? We cannot fix this problem at this time …. getting our economy strong and ending the war in Afghanistan is of utmost importance. So we must continue with this ongoing charade that politicians and corporations have employed all these years — say that we have had enough and employ superficial tactics that will pacify their constituency until the next election time, such as increasing border security, state that procedures will be in place for checking immigration status of employees with NO intention of enforcing the law, etc.
Good article, Diane, I liked the cartoon with your article. Hope some day we will have true immigration reform.”
Creators Syndicate Reader Pat Riley writes:
“AMEN!!!”
The Right is so wrong on the issue of Rights
The most famous and beloved of our founding documents – the Declaration of Independence – makes it very clear who has rights. Humans. They are endowed – not by the zip code of their birth – or even by their government – but by their creator with certain unalienable rights. You get them by being born. The Bill of Rights then went on to enumerate what some of those rights are – but the founding fathers made it clear – they didn’t think that this was all of the those rights – just some of them.
And if the first lady to respond here were to have her way – “those who are not citizens have no rights at all” – the corollary to that would be that when Americans were in any other country -we would have no rights at all – None. No right to know the charges against us – no right to counsel – no right to habeas corpus – no right to see the evidence against us. Is this really the world you want to see come to pass? Or have you maybe been listening to Glenn Beck just a little too much?
I love you, Barry Nolan! You always make me think – and that’s a good thing. ~ DD
There’s a bit of difference between visiting a foreign country and illegally remaining there. As to rights, children born here are US citizens, regardless of what country their parents live in or if the parents are here illegally.
You’re comparing apples and oranges here, Mr. Nolan.
Having lived next to Farmers Branch for a number of years and having read and listened to all the bombast and rhetoric on both sides, it simply boils down to what federal, state and local governments can and can’t do. Or won’t do, as Ms. Dimond relates.
Perhaps Mr. Nolan would like to compare the rights of illegal aliens here vs. his rights in Mexico if he were there illegally. Hell, there’s a lot of countries that are worse than Mexico in that regard. I agree it doesn’t make it right, but who has the vote on this? Citizens and their elected representatives. (That’s a bit of a joke since I left out the lobbyists who shill for special interests.)
While I agree that a local municipality, or hundreds of them, should not be creating laws that are wildly divergent on this matter, it should be up to the states or the federal government to define the limits. So I can understand the frustration that local governments feel when they are feeling threatened enough.
So I’m not opposed to making the laws on a local level until they can be defined on a larger scale, provided that they aren’t unconstitutional. Farmers Branch made it illegal to knowingly rent to illegal immigrants and adopted English as its official language. I don’t exactly see that as all that draconian. Of course you can prefer to look at it as the beginning of further laws. But from my perspective, it’s not like folks have no other alternatives to rent elsewhere.
I know US citizens who travel 60-75 miles a day, each way, to work in the DFW Metroplex. I’m not talking about professionals, I’m talking about construction workers and other labor intensive tasks. You’re taking money out of their pockets by tacitly agreeing to allowing illegals to undercut them on making a living.
That’s a shame.
Now we got a discussion! Barry?
DD Web Site Reader Richard Davies writes:
” Good column. Thanks…Made me think, which is a dangerous thing!!”