On May 26, for the first time in 35 years, the United States Supreme Court issued an opinion on whether states may take action to stop illegal immigration. In Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting, the Supreme Court upheld the Legal Arizona Workers Act of 2007 against multiple challenges claiming that it was preempted by federal law. This act requires all employers in the state to use the E-Verify Internet system to check the work authorization of new hires, and it penalizes employers who knowingly hire unauthorized aliens by suspending their business licenses. (E-Verify, run by the federal government, checks data supplied by immigrants against Homeland Security and Social Security records to make sure they are eligible for employment.)
Advertisement
It was a 5–3 decision, with the conservative justices, plus Anthony Kennedy, siding with Arizona. Justice Elena Kagan recused herself because the Obama Justice Department had weighed in against Arizona when she was solicitor general.
The Justice Department urged the Supreme Court to take the case and participated in the oral argument on the losing side. The Obama administration has made no secret of its hostility toward Arizona and other states that want to use state powers to restore the rule of law in immigration. The Justice Department’s pending lawsuit against Arizona’s SB 1070, a 2010 law governing police procedures when officers encounter illegal aliens, is another example of this hostility.
Arizona’s victory in the high court also gave an unmistakable green light to the other states. A week later, the Alabama legislature passed HB 56 — the strongest law against illegal immigration that any state has enacted to date — and on June 9, Gov. Robert Bentley signed it into law. This measure, known as the Beason-Hammon Act after its main sponsors, includes everything that Arizona has done on the subject, plus a good deal more: prohibiting illegal aliens from attending public universities in the state, providing for civil forfeiture of vehicles used to knowingly transport illegal aliens, prohibiting landlords from knowingly harboring illegal aliens in apartments, and requiring public schools to count the number of illegal aliens receiving a free K–12 education at taxpayer expense.
Behind Alabama and Arizona are a growing number of other states that have taken significant steps down the same road, including Missouri, Mississippi, South Carolina, Georgia, Oklahoma, and Indiana. And the list of states seeking to deter illegal immigration is sure to grow in the future.
These states are motivated by two powerful forces: public frustration over lax enforcement of federal immigration laws, and the fiscal burden that illegal immigration imposes on taxpayers. The Federation for American Immigration Reform calculates that the net fiscal burden caused by illegal immigration is $100 billion per year for all levels of government combined. That’s a net figure, taking into account any taxes that illegal aliens may pay.
About $80 billion of that total falls at the state and local levels — meaning that state and local governments have to pick up the tab when federal immigration laws go unenforced. The biggest items are free K–12 education for children in illegal-alien households; costs incurred through the arrest, trial, and imprisonment of illegal aliens who commit additional crimes; and medical costs imposed on public budgets by illegal aliens. In effect, the federal government’s failure to enforce immigration laws is a massive unfunded mandate. And unlike the federal government, nearly all of the states have a constitutional obligation to balance their budgets, so these costs cannot be ignored.
Where in the Constitution does it authorise federal control of immigration? The words 'immigration' and 'immigrant' do not even appear in the document. It seems to me only the individual States could have the authority to restrict immigration.
Few areas of government display the profound difference between our two political parties more clearly than the Supreme Court. (Especially now that the nitwit liberals appointed by Republicans have all run their idiotic course.)
Excellent article. It gives me a clear image of the entire story. I am a legal immigrant, I came legally in the US in 2005 for grad studies and remained legally after being offered a teaching position. I still do not have a permanent resident status, only now I am entitle to apply for. I am shocked to see the flux of illegal immigrants from South-America. I am also shocked to see what privileges they have here in NYC, almost all banks implemented Spanish as second language while NYC has many ethnic groups. Yet none of them claim their native language to be spoken out loud or to be illegally admitted in the US. The Obama administration made the biggest possible injustice to honest competent individuals legally coming in the United States who are paying taxes, contributing to the American society while the Latinos community made a lifestyle from claiming and bagging rights they do not deserve. I changed my apartment 6 times because of these people and after unsuccessfully calling the police more than 300 times.. From one month to another NYC begins to look like a Third World city
During GW's administration the unemployment level was ranging from 4.7 to 5.4. Obama's is 9.1, Jobs were created as a result and in defiance of the cry from Pelosi that this was jobless recovery. No cry now from her. IF she did and was honest it would be 'Jobless and no recovery!'
It won't be long before the People's Republic of California will have its debt paid off by the United States Taxpayers. What happens in California doesn't stay in California. Job seekers flooding into a country stuck at a nominal 9 + % unemployment rate is how a bad rate becomes the new norm. Pelosi's "Real Americans" hopped back across the border the last time the military draft was reinstituted. Give California the tired, the poor, the huddled masas yearning to take advantage of the "Dream Act". The 14th Amendment is silent about the citizenship status of children of illegals born this side of the border. In fact the legal commentary at the time specifically forbade that interpretation. The United States is the only country on the planet whose government refuses to control its own borders. Who say's that American exceptionalism is a thing of the past. I have never heard of a person naming a country that existed in 1776 that didn't allow slavery. That was one of the few times Americans were unexceptional.
There are very few things more infuriating than going to Costco, Home Depot, Walmart, and almost everywhere else and often being virtually surrounded by blatantly obvious illegal aliens speaking Spanish. I mean it has gotten absurd in the last several years. I was in Houston last winter and there were Walmart EMPLOYEES who could BARELY (really-BARELY)be understood in English.
We are under invasion and the Federal government is ENCOURAGING it. An invasion of poor, low-education, high-birthrate, non-assimilating people who with every new arrival make the U.S. more like the poor, nasty little almost-third-world country they left. It is almost beyond belief that our southern border is as open as it is and that we allow ANY politician to get away with this outrage. If the Chamber of Commerce is really this pro-illegal alien and anti-American, it needs to be hit hard and have its power severely diminished.
As a former Marine officer who once took an oath to support, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, I would GLADLY rejoin the military if I could use my talents, skills and abilities to actually DEFEND the United States on the southern border. When I hear about the drug violence and huge number of illegal border crossings it disturbs me to no end, knowing for a FACT what we could put an IMMEDIATE stop to it with just a FRACTION of our military power, but don't due to the blatant and disgusting self-serving Washington idiots who care more about re-election and cheap labor than our traditional language, culture, and national identity.
With literally tens of millions of legal American citizens out of work, why in God's name would we allow ANY immigrant-let alone illegal ones--to enter for work purposes? American families are losing their homes, going on food stamps in record numbers, and suffering financial devastation from the effects of our current economic situation and we allow illegal aliens who have broken our laws and stolen our identities to work here and send remittances back to their native country to take care of THEIR families. Insane. National suicide-type insane.
We must take the steps needed to stop this invasion and reverse it while we still have a nation left to bequeath to our children. You can count virtually all the Democrats to fight against border enforcement tooth and nail every step of the way, as well as those sell-out Republicans who serve the the interests of greed rather than their own constituents and country.
A great article, can the reporter please find some statistics to show how states with E Verify have higher wages for low skilled work for then states without??
In my field, (employee leasing) I have seen the effect of illegal immigration on wages over the past twenty years. Jobs that used to provide a lower middle class lifestyle now pay minimum wage in off the books cash wages.
Today I spoke with a colleague who found that jobs in TX that required E Verify were paying almost double what jobs without that requirement paid.
Showing the beneficial effects of E Verify (or other enforcement efforts) is the type of ammo we will need to win the argument.
We have all the laws we need but do not enforce them. If the benefits could be proven, perhaps the enforcement would follow.
Congrats to loan. I too am a legal immigrant and have been fortunate enough to gain citizenship many years ago. An American serviceman and his wife took in a kid that nobody wanted. I have been in the US now 50 years and have married and raised my children here. There isn't a day that goes by that I am not thankful to be here. I know what would have happened had it not been for the Americans who saved me. It is a slap in my face each time I hear that our POTUS wants to grant amnesty to law breakers. If these people want the privileges of living in our country they should accept the responsibility that goes along with it. Obey the law and learn the language. Not too difficult for decent people is it?
I have discovered something that I am totally ignorant in; actually the more I read the more I realize just how “dum” I am when it comes to knowing and understanding immigration reform. I am not one to watch the news unless a hurricane is coming or Perdue is discussing Pre-k, More At Four and Head Start.
So, I set out to find an article concerning immigration reform, thinking that it all took place this year. Guess it didn’t, because I did not find many magazines this year covering it; turns out most of it took place last year.
Well, my search finally ended, upon my discovery of National Review from July 4, 2011. The article, entitled Law and Border by Kris Kobach, discusses how the US Supreme Court agreed that the Legal Arizona Workers Act from 2007 was constitutionally legal. This act required that all businesses in Arizona to check the authenticity of their employees background and determine if they were legal to work in the US. It also required they use the E-Verify software that the Federal government recommended. Many opposers felt that this law undermined the Federal government and was thus unconstitutional; they also did not support the idea of punishing those businesses found by-passing the Act by taking their licenses away.
By backing this Act, the US Supreme Court opened the door for more states to create and put in place similar laws. These states include: Alabama, Georgia, Oklahoma, Indiana, Mississippi, and Missouri. Of these states, Alabama’s is considered to be the strictest. Alabama’s immigration law, also known as the Beason-Hammon Act, includes prohibitions of illegal aliens attending public colleges/universities and of landlords from knowingly harboring them; and for public schools to count how many children were illegal immigrants to account for public tax dollars paying for their free K-12 education. Alabama’s law is supposed to go into effect this month.
What these states hope to achieve is by enforcing the new laws, illegal immigrants will decide on their own to pack up and go home. By doing so, according to Kobach, “we can expect that for every illegal-alien-headed household that returns to its country of origin, on average, taxpayers realize a net fiscal benefit of $19, 588 per year”, an amount of money that seems, in my opinion, that the government could then apply to our national deficit.
After I finished reading this article, I tried to figure out just how it pertained to nationalism. Being a teacher, I center on Alabama’s new law and how it expects public schools to take a census of their illegal immigrants. How is that possible? I have always thought that if a child is born in the United States, no matter if their parents are not citizens or legal visitors, that child is a US citizen. Thus, I ask, would these children in K-12 not be legal citizens? Are there children who come across the boarders illegally? According to an article from External Link, “Illegal immigrants' children born in the United States are American citizens, yet they struggle in poverty and uncertainty along with parents who fear deportation, toil largely in low-wage jobs and face layoffs in an ailing economy.” Thus, I determined that the census by public schools is not to account for the children, but to account for their parents. Now, I wonder, what will happen to these parents once they are determined? Will they be deported and their American born children left in our foster care systems? These children need the public schools so that they can receive an education and hopefully one day improves their own living conditions and those of their parents. I must ask myself, is this not what I hope of my own children? Is this not part of the American Dream?
Overall, the article covers several issues using terms such as Left and conservative justices and Obama administration. For me, apparently a simple minded person when it comes to the confusing realm of political jargon, I am clueless to who is who and why they view things the way they do. (I hope to clear this fog by the end of this semester.) As Kobach states at the conclusion of the article, “the only way to end illegal immigration is for both the federal government and the states to take the field, working together to restore the rule of law.” I agree with this, but am not certain if I can explain why I do so.
The only other thing I would love for a magazine or anyone to answer is this. Why is immigration such a problem? If we were to send all illegal immigrant out of this country, who would farm the fields or do those “dirty” jobs no one wants to do? Who would model hard work and respect for their elders and family like immigrants do? What would happen to the prices of food and clothes without immigrants? And are Americans not immigrants when we follow the bread trail to China to work for factories that once called the United States home? (I know, not many are lucky enough to do so…except maybe the CEO’s.) I still believe that illegal immigration is not a key ingredient to the American budget crisis; but the loss of our jobs to other countries is. Illegal immigration is just a symptom of our laziness. We can’t blame them for taking jobs that 10 to 15 years ago no one wanted because people had wonderful jobs for big factories and businesses.
America is a melting pot. Considering this, our nationalism is a potpourri of other nations, well blended. The unfortunate loss of jobs overseas is the skunk in the pot.
