Thread: NE: Janssen explains Illegal immigration Enforcement Act

Janssen explains Illegal immigration Enforcement Act

Chris Zavadil/Fremont Tribune FremontTribune.com
Posted: Tuesday, March 1, 2011 11:00 am


State Sen. Charlie Janssen of Fremont said opponents of LB48 are attempting to "blur the issues," and his remarks to the Judiciary Committee Wednesday will be intended to set the record straight what's in his bill.

The bill, also known as the Illegal Immigration Enforcement Act, is set for a committee hearing at 1:30 p.m.

"I'm going to lay out what the bill is; most people don't understand what the bill is," said Janssen, who authored and introduced LB48.

He said he will defend the bill and probably express "some of my frustration with the lack of movement by this body on it."

"In reality I don't think it's going to come out of committee based on the votes. I think I've probably got two, maybe three votes on that committee and I need five," he said.

Eight senators comprise the Judiciary Committee, including District 11 Sen. Brenda Council of Omaha, an outspoken opponent of LB48, whose LR39 calling for the federal government to act on illegal immigration, will also be heard by the Judiciary Committee Wednesday.

She was not available for comment Monday.

Janssen, who does not serve on the Judiciary Committee, called LR39 "a do nothing resolution" that conflicts with LB48.

"Resolutions do nothing, and that's what we've been doing with illegal immigration. I'm not going to stand there and act like I support something that is a do-nothing resolution," he said.

Waiting for action from Congress "is unrealistic," Janssen said.

"The last effort to address illegal immigration at the federal level was 14 years ago," he said. "The last thorough effort to address illegal immigration was 24 years ago. I am not prepared to surrender our state budget to the whims of a Congress that has shown no fortitude in making tough choices."

LB48 would prohibit so-called "sanctuary cities" from restricting enforcement of immigration laws; law enforcement would determine the immigration status of a person lawfully stopped or detained when reasonable suspicion exists that the person is in the United States illegally; immigrants would be required to register with the federal government and carry documentation with them; it would be a state crime for illegal aliens to work in Nebraska; and it would prohibit harboring, transporting or concealing persons unlawfully present in the country.

"I'm pulling this stuff from federal laws that are on the books," Janssen said.

"That's the maddening part of this," he said. "We are supposed to be enforcing these laws right now and the feds are failing to do so. What I'm attempting to do is make it a state crime so we have standing as a state to arrest people that are here illegally and to enforce immigration laws."

He said he worked with the state attorney general in crafting the bill in expectation that its passage would trigger legal challenges.

A key to the bill, he said, is people would have to break another law first in order for the provisions of LB48 to be applied, and in those cases police already use IDs, such as a driver's license, to determine who you are.

"If you get pulled over for speeding, at that point the officer looks for reasonable suspicion," he said. "Reasonable suspicion is a well-defined concept. There have been over 800 court opinions on what reasonable suspicion is, it's been to the Supreme Court, so we can do this under the law, you can detain somebody and you can ask somebody for identification to prove who they are, and we should be doing it because it's a federal law."

In non-traffic related incidents as well police try to positively identify suspects, Janssen said, pointing to birth certificates, Social Security cards, state or tribal ID cards, and other forms of ID requiring proof of lawful presence prior to issuance.

"Most Nebraskans carry identification on their persons at all times," Janssen said. "IDs are requested at banks, grocery stores, and most other places of business where one uses his or her credit or debit cards. This is neither overly burdensome nor unreasonable."

Immigrants have been required since at least 1952 to carry registration cards, and are already prohibited from working in the United States, Janssen said.

The bill explicitly states that people could not be profiled, according to Janssen.

"That's a huge misconception," he said. "It's just another attempt by the side that wants to do nothing to try to blur the topic and make this a race issue. Illegal is illegal whether you're from Canada, Venezuela, Mexico, Russia, or wherever, that shouldn't play a part in it."

Janssen said a fiscal note has not been prepared for the bill, but added that the cost of doing nothing is unsustainable.

"You can talk to people on the other side who will say it's going to cost millions upon millions to enforce and it's going to be impossible to enforce," he said. "I would say the cost of not doing anything far exceeds the cost of what this proposal would do."


http://fremonttribune.com/news/local/ar ... 03286.html

Published Tuesday March 1, 2011

Clash of opinions on immigration

By Paul Hammel

LINCOLN — Officials with the state’s two largest police departments, in Omaha and Lincoln, oppose adoption of an Arizona-style immigration law in Nebraska.

They say deputizing local officers to enforce federal immigration laws would significantly raise taxpayer costs, hurt existing crime-fighting efforts and spawn dozens of lawsuits for false arrest.

The Nebraska proposal, Legislative Bill 48, could discourage members of immigrant communities from sharing information about crimes with police out of fear their immigration status could be checked, said Deputy Omaha Police Chief Todd Schmaderer.

“Our mission is to reduce crime and reduce the fear of crime,â€