Political Cartoon

Find more immigration political cartoons at http://politicalhumor.about.com/od/immigration/ig/Immigration-Cartoons.

HB 1202 Raises Concerns for Texas Police Forces

Tim Eaton from the American-Statesman reported on Texas Legislature HB 1202 in an article published February 9, 2011. In addition to providing an overview of this pending legislation, if passed would make it a state jail felony to knowingly hire an undocumented immigrant, Eaton highlights significant concerns this bill raises among Texas police forces.

Luis Figueroa of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund is quoted in the article as he stated, “Police have neither the expertise nor the resources to determine someone’s work status, and officers who might raid a company wouldn’t necessarily know what documents to look for.”

Visit statesman.com to read the complete article: http://www.statesman.com/news/texas-politics/new-bill-targets-employers-who-hire-illegal-immigrants-1244256.html

Similar concerns were voiced by Austin Police Department members in a recent news feature on Austin News, MSNBC:

Reform Immigration for Texas Alliance

The Reform Immigration for Texas Alliance (RITA) is a multi-sector statewide network, organized in support of  comprehensive immigration reform.  RITA’s executive committee includes representatives from immigrant rights coalitions from across the state. RITA members support and advocate for immigration legislation that would:

- Provide a pathway to citizenship

- Keep families together

- Respect  human and civil rights

- Foster community security

- Establish a responsible and accountable border policy

- Support immigrants’ integration

- Develop a practical system for future workers

- Address the root causes of migration

Visit the RITA webpage to read more about each specific area of immigration reform they support.

Localization of Immigration Policy?

American University School of Law releases a scholarly publication called The Modern American. A recent article, “Insecure Communities: How Increased Localization of Immigration Enforcement under President Obama through the Secure Communities Program Makes Us Less Safe, and May Violate the Constitution,” (Volume 6, Issue 2) attempts to outline the current national political debate surrounding the localization of immigration enforcement. In the article, written by Rachel Zoghlin, the Secure Communities strategy is introduced as a case study to outline the effects increased localization of immigration enforcement can have on a community. Originating in Virginia, this program has expanded and as of September 2010, was activated in thirty-two states. The author highlights both the strengths and weaknesses of Secure Communities Program in relation to immigrant rights.

The Supremacy Clause (Article VI, clause 2) of the U.S. Constitution has been frequently invoked to give federal government exclusive jurisdiction over immigration matters. In spite of this federal jurisdiction, much has been done to equip local police forces with the tools necessary to facilitate and enforce federal immigration policy.  The Secure communities initiative falls under the umbrella of an established program called ACCESS (Agreements of Cooperation in Communities to Enhance Safety and Security) which was created by ICE’s Office of State and Local Coordination in 2007.

In 2002, Attorney General Ashcroft made a significant statement in a memorandum, that local officers have “inherent authority” to make immigration arrests based on violation of civil immigration laws. This non-official language (never has been written into federal regulation) has been a major tool for many local law enforcement agencies who have since been working to justify their roles as immigration enforcers.

Secure Communities is viewed to take localization to a new level. Local police officers who are not trained by federal immigration enforcement officers, are authorized to send the fingerprints of any charged (but not yet convicted) individual to ICE. Although this program, as indicated by its name is intended to keep communities safe from high level criminal offenders, 2009 data shows that of the 111,000 aliens identified and detained, 10% were convicted of the lowest level offenses (see article for description of levels). 90% identified through the program were deemed as not having a threat to their communities. Half of those currently detained have no criminal convictions at all.

Problems of Secure Communities programs include:

- Prominent Racial Profiling

- Chilling Effect on Latino/a Communities

- Lack of Oversight and Accountability

- Potential Infringement of Constitutional Rights and Denial of Due Process

Various Supreme Court rulings have granted immigrants some constitutional rights.  However, as laws largely recognize immigration status as a voluntary condition, the potential discrimination in question as a result of programs such as Secure Communities, must be examined further in order to deem it unconstitutional. However, as this article points out, one could argue that the immigration status of many undocumented immigrants is in fact involuntary.

The article concludes with the argument that federal-local collaborations are not the answer- but rather comprehensive immigration reform that considers “why” individuals come to the U.S. illegally.  As cited from Migration Policy Institute, “Our immigration laws provide inadequate legal avenues to enter the United States for employment purposes at levels that our economy demands.”

Read the Article in full here: http://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1135&context=tma&sei-redir=1#search=%22arizona-style+immigration+legislation%22

House Bill 17

House Bill 17 (HB 17) was filed November 8, 2010 by Representative Debbie Riddle and had a hearing on Tuesday April 19, 2011. It is currently pending in committee. If passed, the bill would take effect September 1, 2011.


HB 17 involves identifying and removing undocumented immigrants during police stops if the police officer has probable cause to believe the suspect is without legal documentation. The full text of the page long house bill can be found here: House Bill 17.


This Arizona-style immigration enforcement bill would allow police officers to violate Federal law and encourage racial profiling of Hispanics. Police officers would be allowed to question suspects about their immigration based on subjective “reasonable suspicion” that the suspect does not have legal documentation. This bill would not protect legal immigrants who are either awaiting court hearings or H-1B visa holders awaiting extensions to their visa.


HB 17 would make it a Class B Misdemeanor to be in Texas without legal documents, punishable by jail time up to 180 days and a fine of up to $2,000.00. HB 17 is unconstitutional, since states are not permitted to establish their own independent immigration policies or obstruct federal immigration law.

The Economic Impact of Local Immigration Regulation

In the Cardoza Law Review, an article entitled: “The Economic Impact of Local Immigration Regulation: An Empirical Analysis," by Huyen Pham and Pham Hoang Van discusses the economic impact of anti-immigration laws.

The anti-immigration laws were of many different forms such as those requiring police enforcement of federal immigration laws, those restricting housing and employment to legal immigration status, and those restricting government transactions to English only.

Based on statistics from the U.S. Census Bureau, such enacted laws resulted in a 1 to 2% drop in employment and a payroll drop between .8 and 1.9%. These laws also hurt specific industries such as grocery and liquor stores.

The article concludes that local immigration regulation should be based on empirical evidence of the law’s effects. Emphasis on economic costs for enforcement of laws and the effects anti-immigration laws have on employment should be taken into consideration.

View the full journal article here: http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=bf5920e4-3bb8-4f2a-9844-41f9d8834c32%40sessionmgr114&vid=6&hid=123

Immigration Reform- What does the Center for Public Policy Priorities have to say?

In a policy page released to the public in April, 2010, the Center for Public Policy Priorities (CPPP) makes it clear that immigration reform is imperative, however from their position, an approach to reform similar to Arizona’s model is the wrong way to go. This policy institute promotes responsible, common-sense action.

This common sense approach advocates for reform that “Bolsters, not undermines the contributions that immigrants make to our economy; Improves labor standards and increases wages for all workers; Enhances our national security and safety; and Respects human rights.”

CPPP argues that the current immigration system does not reflect the need for immigrants in the U.S. labor market, nor the net positive contributions that immigrants provide for the U.S. economy. CPPP is in general agreement with an approach to immigration policy proposed by Texas Employers for Immigration Reform (TEIR).  Under this approach to managing immigration, a market-driven system is supported, where temporary immigrant workers, combined with clear, sensible enforcement, disincentives for illegal immigration, enhanced border security, and a path to legal status for undocumented workers currently in the U.S. are the key ingredients.

The CPPP’s position on immigration reform stems from its work and advocacy in six major areas of public policy:

- Economic Opportunity

- Quality Affordable Health Insurance

- Basic Needs

- Child Well-being and Child Protection

- Effective Public Administration

- Fair and Adequate Taxation

Visit the CPPP webpage for more information about the institute’s stance on other public policy issues in Texas.