Who was victor in immigration decision?
Moderated by Rick Badie
Who can claim victory from the U.S. Supreme Court’s split decision regarding Arizona’s immigration law? Supporters of state immigration laws or their opponents? Today, Sen. Barry Loudermilk writes the court recognized that the lack of federal enforcement has forced states to fill the gap and therefore upheld the “show-me-your-papers” provision; and Atlanta immigration attorney Charles Kuck says that provision would raise constitutional concerns and won’t pass muster in any state.
Victory? It’s a blow for HB 87
By Charles Kuck
The Supreme Court’s decision in Arizona v. United States is a resounding defeat for state anti-immigration movements, particularly in Georgia. The court’s decision puts an end to state efforts to enforce federal immigration law and create mini-state immigration systems.
As Justice Anthony Kennedy noted in his opinion: “[T]he States are precluded from regulating conduct in a field that Congress, acting within its proper authority, has determined must be regulated by its exclusive governance.” Georgia legislators ignored warnings of this last year when considering HB 87 and chose to take the political rather than the legal path.
The pending challenges to the two stayed provisions of HB 87 will now move forward. U.S. District Court Judge Thomas Thrash found two key parts of HB 87, Sections 7 (the harboring, inducing, transporting provision) and Section 8 (the “show-me-your-papers” provision) were preempted, and barred those two provisions from taking effect. The Court of Appeals will now rule, in light of the Supreme Court’s decision, whether these two sections of HB 87 will remain invalidated.
The Supreme Court threw out three provisions of the Arizona law that, if implemented, would have conflicted with the federal plan. As a result, laws requiring the arrest by state officials of people they “reasonably believed” to be illegal, of those who did not carry proof of immigration status (as if that could be determined with a simple documents), and making it a crime to work in Arizona without work authorization (currently not against any federal law), cannot be implemented.
Section 7 of HB 87 is much like a federal statute and attempts to replicate and enhance federal penalties. It is pre-empted in that it directly affects the federal government’s efforts to enforce existing immigration laws. Section 7 will never be allowed to take effect.
State politicians who supported HB 87’s passage have made dubious claims of “victory” regarding the court’s decision. Did they actually read the opinion? While the Supreme Court allowed the “show-me-your-papers” provision to stand, it offered a caveat. The federal government only challenged the statute on federal pre-emption grounds, not on civil rights, due process or equal protection grounds. If the “show-me-your-papers” provision only requires state officers to conduct a status check during the course of an authorized, lawful detention or after a detainee has been released, the provision likely would survive preemption. But Kennedy added: “Detaining individuals solely to verify their immigration status would raise constitutional concerns.” That’s an open door to further challenges.
In Georgia, anyone who is arrested (including those driving without a license) and brought to any jail already has their fingerprints run though the federal immigration database. If a “hit” occurs, Immigration and Customs Enforcement issues a detainer asking for a 48-hour hold to give ICE time to pick up the person. Section 8 is not necessary for this to happen. To remain constitutionally valid, the police would have to conduct its “immigration check” on the side of a busy road without extending the stop. In practicality, this is virtually impossible and unnecessary. Such stops also would have to be “color blind” as there is no legitimate way to determine a person’s immigration status simply by looking at him or her.
The federal government never joined the Georgia HB 87 litigation, and the current lawsuit focuses on the civil rights, due process and equal protection violations that already have occurred to Georgia immigrants and citizens as a result of HB 87. This does not bode well for the future enforcement of Section 8.
Perhaps we can move on and work together to demand that Congress fix our broken immigration system.
Charles Kuck, an Atlanta immigration attorney, serves on the executive board of the Georgia Association of Latino Elected Officials.
Ruling bodes well for Georgia
By Barry Loudermilk
The Supreme Court decision on the Arizona immigration law is significant to Georgia. It upheld the key provision in Arizona’s SB 1070, and more significantly recognized the tremendous impact illegal immigration is having on the states. It identified the true source of our illegal immigration problem.
In 2011, there were 694,193 foreign-born citizens who legally became naturalized citizens of the United States, according to the Department of Homeland Security. Of this number, 17,761 have found their permanent home in Georgia. Close to three-quarters of a million people promised to obey and uphold the laws and become invested citizens of our country. I am excited for what the future promises these newly minted citizens. However, it is estimated the number of illegal immigrants in the U.S. totals 10.8 million, which far overshadows the number of citizens who enter through legal measures.
Besides the impact illegal immigration has had on the employment market in the U.S., the Supreme Court also recognized more significant problems. Justice Anthony Kennedy stated there is an “epidemic of crime, safety risks, serious property damage and environmental problems associated with the influx of illegal migration.” In 2006, I traveled to southern Arizona to witness the problems associated with the influx of illegal immigration across the border. I was astonished at what I experienced during my few days along the border, which is consistent with Kennedy’s statement.
Justices on both sides of the decision also cited that the federal government’s refusal to enforce immigration law is the source of the state’s illegal immigration problem. Kennedy stated the decisions of this president and his two predecessors to significantly ignore federal immigration law have driven states to take these matters into their own hands.
After experiencing years of border violence and other criminal activity like those identified by Kennedy, Arizona decided to act under the authority of the 10th Amendment and define its own laws and regulations in accordance with existing federal law. However, when SB 1070 passed, opponents lined up to cite the law’s “unconstitutionality,” though the main provision was taken directly from federal law that is not being enforced.
In 2011, Georgia enacted a law similar to Arizona’s SB 1070. Like Arizona’s, Georgia’s law allows local law enforcement to fill a gap where federal enforcement has vacated its duties by validating citizenship of those suspected to be in the country illegally. While Georgia’s law focuses on taking all possible steps to ensure public employers are not hiring illegal immigrants (and granting safeguards to those who act in good faith), it also shows Arizona that we stand in solidarity with its actions. We will not attempt to harbor those who enable lawbreakers. We will not provide a safe haven for those who have entered the country illegally. With this decision, and last year’s decision to uphold E-Verify, Georgia will continue to address our illegal immigration problems.
The U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling on Arizona’s immigration law sets an important precedent. The strongest part of the law was allowed to stand, which means that any state law that takes a similar approach to mirror existing federal law, will stand. As always, Georgia welcomes those from other countries who seek to enter through legal measures. A qualified, taxpaying workforce will bolster our recovering economy and provide another marketable incentive for economic development opportunities. Our country should remain a beacon of hope for those willing to enter in a legal and orderly manner, while deterring those who ignore the rule of law and attempt to illegally obtain the privileges afforded by our great state and nation.
Sen. Barry Loudermilk, R-Cassville, represents District 52.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
12 comments Add your comment
Dave Francis
June 28th, 2012
6:27 pm
Here is a summary of the Constitutional TEA PARTY ideology, which from its inception has advocated a halt to illegal immigration that Democrats, Liberals or Republicans pay lip service too. Since the 1986 fraudulent amnesty illegal immigrants and migrants has poured into America, through a border that still remains porous. The television broadcasts of CNN, ABC and other stations always show the huge steel reinforced fences between Mexico and the United States. This is misleading as further along the demarcation between two countries, there is nothing more than a few thin strands of rusty barbed wire. Go to ‘AMERICAN PATROL, to be enlightened about the true length of the border fence and other details. For every Democrat, Liberal or Republican incumbent in office, we need to replace with a honest fresh face TEA PARTY leadership. We must stop President Obama’s ‘Tax and spend” epidemic or Mitt Romney potential to press for better advantages for Wall Street and financial institutions.
Just today with the stunning news the Supreme Court in supporting ObamaCare, could be yet another nail in America’s economic coffin. This is going to further encourage escapees from poverty stricken countries, to bring their sick by international flight or through state borders ; people needing surgery as an appendicitis to major surgeries, will arrive here and because of federal mandates American taxpayers will be further taxed to pay.
IT is the Time of the PEOPLE’S PARTY. It is the time for the moderate TEA PARTY, not the far left or right. The TEA PARTY is complimented by man/women; African, White, Hispanic, Asian and other Americans of different nationalities. The TEA PARTY is a wealth of different religions, faiths, gay and ordinary people of every walk of life. Remember a large perpetual majority who votes for President Obama for a second term could are most liable none citizens or American citizens who spend their days watching TV, selling drugs, collecting public assistance, food stamps and living off the rest of us as parasites. These are the people who want something for nothing. THE TEA PARTY BELIEVES IN INDIVIDUAL CHOICE, NOT RELYING ON GOVERNMENT FOR EVERYTHING. Illegal aliens don’t just come here for jobs but to pilfer state treasuries because elected officials have allowed this to happen. As an example of states in big trouble every month the Sanctuary State of California–as just naming one haven has a deficit of $15.7 Billion dollars, with over $1 billion dollars annually soaked up by illegal alien welfare and rising.
The exception is the sick and true disabled human beings, so think of their dilemma that taxpayer money should be assisting citizens, instead of illegal aliens. If you are frustrated with feeding the rest of the world, unable to get a decent job then join the TEA PARTY. The controversial immigration debate and the problems it has brought; it is a theft of your taxes. Obama’s new the rules and regulations have been forced on American with its so called ‘Political Correctness’ along with its growing taint of a growing Socialism agenda impregnating young minds in the schools and universities. President Obama has placed obstacles to halt the extraction of valuable energy resources in a time of urgent need. This administration has squashed efforts to extract oil, natural gas and coal; that we could lower the expenditure from transportation and we could sell residual amounts to friendly foreign countries. The progressive’s zealots in the environmentalist world have stopped the laying of oil pipelines from Canada to Texas, when America could be self sufficient and not relying on Saudi Arabia, and other foreign potentates. Shouldn’t we become a creditor again, instead of a debtor to China and other investing countries?
This is the time when every American who believes in the ‘Rule of Law’ and steps forward to let their Senator or Congress person knows how you will vote. Bombard politician’s aide, that you insist the lawmaker sponsor E-Verify and the Birthright Citizenship bill (H.R.140). NEITHER PARTY DOESN’T SEEM TO CARE THAT THIS COUNTRY IS BEING OVERWHELMED BY THE POVERTY FROM SOUTH OF THE BORDER, BUT ALSO A MAGNET TO MILLIONS OF PREGNANT WOMEN WHO ONCE ARRIVE HERE CAN STEAL THE WELFARE OF AMERICAN FAMILIES. ONCE SMUGGLED THROUGH THE BORDER OR STEP OF A PLANE, 400.000 ILLEGAL ALIEN MOTHERS ANNUALLY CAN REAP THE REWARDS OF CRIMINALLY ENTERING THE UNITED STATES. THIS PUBLIC HELP SHOULD BE GOING TO OUR OWN CITIZENS NOT TO EDUCATE FOREIGN CHILDREN ORE FREE MEDICAL CARE, THAT TAXPAYERS EVENTUALLY RECEIVE THE BILL.
Citizen voters should phone Congress at the central Switchboard at 202-224-3121. Insist YOUR CONGRESSPERSON TO accomplish their obligation to the oath of office and stop rewarding the businesses that use cheap labor or the pro-illegal alien lawmakers that are desperate for votes, no matter illegal or legal. By only voting for those who favor the TEA PARTY ideology is the veil of corruption going to be lifted from American politics. Use the power of your VOTE to demand politicians sponsor good policies or we are destined to become like Europe, besieged by the poverty from other countries.
JV
June 28th, 2012
10:46 am
May be some “victors” but it sure wasn’t the states including Georgia. They won nothing.
DMCS
June 28th, 2012
10:34 am
HB 1070, HB87 and all the renditions are simply a racist driven measure by conservative Republicans only packaged and dressed to make it seem that they are trying to address a “problem”.
From what I have been following all of the claims by the Republicans that all illegal immigrants are a serious issue is bogus when they have been a very big part in our economy occupying jobs that are viable to us but NO American is willing to take even when they offered them and were forced to open them up for parolees and convicts, yet the agriculture industry is still struggling to get a quality work force that will withstand this gruesome labor.
This entire debate showed how hateful and hypocritical Americans really are especially those claiming to be Christian’s and having all of these morals and family values but of course ONLY if it applies to them. A compassionate person can easily comprehend that when someone has hardly no options becomes desperate especially when their families are suffering will resort to desperate measures.
A person entering our country in my eyes in no worse then someone trespassing however, I find it a lot more life threatening when American citizen’s break laws daily by speeding, cutting people off, running red lights, texting while driving, DUI’s, no using their signals or follow signs such as Yield because those can cause serious accidents and kill someone as it does daily. However, those same citizens that yell “Law is Law” or “what part of illegal do you not understand” are conducting in this type behavior every single day but it is okay because of course we are different.
Offering a way for them to become legal and citizens should be a no brainer when you have millions of bad citizens, we should be embracing those that are willing to pledge loyalty to our country, make contributions and take us back to greatness because right now we are wailing off the beaten path.
Van Jones
June 28th, 2012
7:54 am
Mr. Kuck is being deliberately misleading by referring to it as “state anti-immigration movements” as opposed to anit-illegal-immigration-regardless-of-where-they-are-from movement.
DeborahinAthens
June 28th, 2012
7:05 am
The show me your papers provision will live only until the first American Citizen who is held in a cell for a day or two while the police try to find out if they are legal or not sues the pants off whatever municipality did the deed. The case will go back to the Supreme Court. We can only pray that the American Citizen will win. Do we really want to live in this kind of country?
seabeau
June 28th, 2012
4:43 am
Congress will never clean up this mess due to the major parties pandering for votes. It is to the Individual states benefit that States Rights are expanded in order to prevent the Federal Government ’s inability to act in a timely maner from occuring again . The States are given the power in the Constitution to call for a Constitutional Convention to correct and eliminate issues that affect them adversly. This power in itself is proof positive that the Founders intended that the States themselves were to be the the controllers of our government, not the Federal Government!
SAWB
June 27th, 2012
11:47 pm
No one really wins on this one since our political leaders continue to fall short in addressing our failed immigration policies. We have to find a long term way to fairly address the issue of those who are currently in this country illegally. These folks are not leaving and there is no way we are going to forcefully deport them. At the same time we need a fair and controlled process for people to enter this country that also address the issue of border security. Neither party has been willing to comprehensively address the matter and continue to use immigration as a wedge issue. However, as mentioned earlier the only real winner is Obama even though it is obviously a bit of election year pandering.
Bernie
June 27th, 2012
11:17 pm
President OBAMA is the winner on this one hands down. His announcement a week a week ago and prior to this decision verifies for all Hispanics who is most deserving of their vote.
The Republicans and Baggers are viewed as vicious racist and mean spirited people to the BONE. Mitt has certainly been leading from behind on this one….Always the bridesmaid never the BRIDE.
JF McNamara
June 27th, 2012
9:41 pm
Nothing actually changed, did it? Criminals always got checked, and you can’t stop people just to check status. Even if you do, the State can’t deport them. You can just keep them in jail longer, right? All that is going to do is increase cost and its not worth it in most cases. If someone has a busted tail light, I would rather not pay for three hots and a cot for two days.
Curtis Rivers
June 27th, 2012
9:38 pm
Senator Loudermilk is my senator. Besides being rabidly conservative, his attachment to the anti-immigrant rheoric of the extreme right is part-and-parcel of the image he presents. His arguments in this article are foolish, and the sounding wind of a person whose cause is unjust, unproven, and lost. He is full of bombast, with absolutely no footing on which to stand. Charles Kuck, however, gives a lucid and legally insightful to the beginning of the end of the hateful legislation Mr. Loudermilk protects: HB 87. Loudermilk claims HB87 will stand. He sounds like proponents of unjust lost causes throughout history. He is all “sound and fury, signifying nothing.”