Thread: States, cities take harder stance on illegal immigrants

http://www.nepanews.com/site/news.cfm?n ... 5812&rfi=6

07/19/2006
States, cities take harder stance on illegal immigrants
By ROBERT TANNER, AP National Writer , The Associated Press

Dismay over Washington gridlock on immigration has inspired cities and states to pass their own measures, most of which make life harder for undocumented workers and demand that employers, law enforcement officers and even landlords act as the front line.
Advertisement


The city of Hazleton, Pa., last week passed one of the harsher laws, approving $1,000 fines for landlords who provide housing to illegal immigrants and denying business permits to employers who give them jobs. Local governments from California to Idaho to Florida are weighing similar steps. States approved nearly 60 new laws in the last few months, overwhelmingly restrictive or punitive.


"It's the blunt failure of any true leadership in Washington, D.C. Everything runs downhill," said Andy Anderson, a city councilor in Palm Bay, Fla., who is pushing for an ordinance to punish employers who hire illegal immigrants.


One question is whether the local and state laws would stand if Congress overcame the split between the Senate and the House and approved a new federal law. Many would be superseded, officials acknowledge _ but they say it's better to pass a local measure that won't last than nothing at all, and right now it's unclear whether Congress will make a deal.


"We have to do something, and it has to be done, like, yesterday," Anderson said.


Colorado and Georgia led the way with sweeping laws that aim to require proof of citizenship for services and also target employers who hire illegal immigrants.


Overall, 27 states passed laws toughening rules on education, employment, legal services and identification, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. The 59 new laws that went on the books in this year's legislative sessions were a big increase from the 37 immigration-related laws from the year before.


This year's batch tilted sharply toward cracking down on immigrants, in contrast to earlier years when there was a mix of legislation, some of it loosening rules for obtaining services or education.


"Lawmakers and mayors, they want to make their area as inhospitable to illegal aliens as possible," said Susan Wysoki at the Federation for American Immigration Reform, which supports tougher border security and an end to illegal immigration.


Colorado's measure, for instance, could remove as many as 50,000 illegal immigrants now living in the state from programs such as Medicare, Medicaid, unemployment insurance, energy assistance and aging and adult services, according to GOP Gov. Bill Owens.


Other Republicans, however, said the law went too easy on illegal immigrants, complaining that minors still get benefits.


But even states aren't moving fast enough for communities that feel overwhelmed:


_ Hazleton, Pa., also is considering whether to require all tenants to register and prove their legal residency. "Illegal immigrants are destroying the city," said Lou Barletta, the city's Republican mayor. "I don't want them here, period."


_ In Idaho, commissioners in Canyon County filed a racketeering lawsuit against agricultural companies accused of hiring illegal immigrants. A judge struck down the lawsuit but an appeal is being pursued.


In Florida's Palm Bay, the council is weighing whether to adopt an ordinance that would slap employers who hire illegal immigrants with a civil fine of $200 or with a criminal misdemeanor, which would carry penalties up to a $500 fine or 60 days in jail.


The city near the Atlantic Coast in southern Brevard County has undergone a housing boom, and with it an influx of crews of illegal immigrants that win the low bids on projects, Anderson said. Contractors have had to decide whether to hire illegals or lose out on jobs.


In 10 states, the majority of the new laws targeted employers as the lure that draws illegal immigrants to their communities. Other legislatures made benefits harder to get, or cracked down on human trafficking, toughened regulations or fines against fake IDs, or made education more expensive for illegals.


Nebraska stood out this year because it went in the opposite direction, when lawmakers overrode Gov. Dave Heineman's veto and provided in-state college tuition for the children of illegal immigrants who went to high school in the state.


In earlier years, one of the arguments for leaving immigration issues alone is that they were a federal matter, not a state or local one. But now the political landscape has changed.


"States certainly have the right to determine how to regulate identification, they can regulate instate tuition, and use of their own employment law, said Sherri Steisel, a lawyer with the National Council of State Legislatures.


Advocates for immigrants aren't waiting either for an answer from Washington, either. They are threatening to sue to stop some of the new laws from taking effect.

added to homepage

http://www.alipac.us/modules.php?name=N ... e&sid=1369

I think this is great, and want to do the same in our great state of Texas. People are so fed up with this situation, and the Governor is pushing that Trans Texas Corridor down our throats, which furthers the North American Union agenda.

I personally think that our activism right at the local and state level is the answer. We need to reestablish states' rights.