Sponsors fine-tuning illegal immigration bill

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
February 5, 2011
By Jeremy Redmon

Ramsey and others working on 16th draft to strengthen it against court challenges.

The author of major legislation targeting illegal immigration in Georgia confirmed Friday that he and others have already started revising his 17-page bill partly to protect it against potential court challenges.

At a packed hearing in the state Capitol, Rep. Matt Ramsey told the House Judiciary Non-Civil Committee that he and others were already on a 16th draft of House Bill 87, also called the "Illegal Immigration Reform and Enforcement Act".

The draft he presented to the panel Friday, however, did not delete the bill's original key provisions, including one that requires police to investigate the immigration status of certain people they reasonably suspect of being in the country illegally.

Some committee members, meanwhile, raised tough questions about parts of the bill.

They asked about one part that would enable state residents to sue local governments for not complying with certain state laws, including one provision aimed at preventing cities and counties from hiring illegal immigrants.

Some committee members said they were concerned people could file frivolous lawsuits against financially struggling governments.

They also asked whether there would be any extra state funding available to cover the cost of additional police expenses that could stem from the bill.

So many people showed up for the committee hearing that officials directed some to other hearing rooms where they could watch the proceedings live on television.

The committee is scheduled to resume its hearing on the bill at 9:30 a.m. Tuesday, when many supporters and opponents are scheduled to speak.

The sign-up list for speakers grew to three pages on Friday.

The hearing for Ramsey's bill had not even gotten under way Friday morning before the American Civil Liberties Union threatened to challenge the measure in court.

ACLU officials said the bill and a similar bill in the Senate called SB 40 resemble Arizona laws that were halted by a federal judge last year after the Obama administration challenged their constitutionality.

"The proposed bills are unconstitutional and violate core American values," Debbie Seagraves, executive director of the ACLU of Georgia, said in a prepared statement released early Friday.

"The ACLU of Georgia will challenge such racial-profiling legislation if passed in Georgia."

Ramsey and Republican Sen. Jack Murphy, the authors of the Senate bill, have consistently argued their bills are constitutional and already include protections against racial profiling.

"This is just the latest example of why the ACLU has become completely marginalized as a tool of "extreme left-wing liberalist causes," said Ramsey, a Republican from Peachtree City.

"They are obviously way out of touch and out of the mainstream and not interested in addressing any of the real problems facing the citizens of our state nor the U.S."

Similar to one of the Arizona laws halted by the federal judge, Ramsey's and Murphy's bills will require state and local police to investigate the immigration status of people they reasonably suspect of being in the country illegally.

They also will authorize police to arrest them if they are in the country illegally and transport them to a federal jail.

The Georgia legislation will also require certain private businesses to use a federal program, E-Verify.

This program verifies that employees are eligible to work in the United States.

Rep. Rich Golick, chairman of the House Judiciary Non-Civil Committee and a co-sponsor of HB 87, said it doesn't make sense for the ACLU to quickly threaten a suit against the bill now, when it is still being revised.

Golick, a Republican from Smyrna, said his panel will review the new draft of the bill when it meets on Tuesday.

"I know there will be additional changes that will reflect actual policy changes, certainly in the next draft and definitely by the time we go to a markup," he said.

http://www6.lexisnexis.com/publisher/En ... 63&start=1