Different Views on the New Immigration Bills
To start off, below are two analogies that bring forth the two opposite sides of the debate. This will create a general idea on what the differing points are between both of the sides.
Point of View #1
A poor Hispanic farmer scrapes the ground to plant seeds for the next harvest. In the hope of a better life, the farmer and his family escaped the difficulties of their previous home twenty years ago. Now suddenly the farmer sees the flashing lights of a police car and realizes that his worst fear has been discovered. He rushes to protect his family but, alas, he is too late. The deputy chief faces him and says, "You and your family will be deported back to Mexico unless you can show me your citizenship." Of course, the farmer had nothing of that sort. He simply watched as his life was ripped apart.
Point of View #2
Imagine that one day someone intrudes into your house, claiming that your house is now also his. He takes your food, your money, and everything that you have worked hard for. He then goes out and steals your job! What will you do now with the job market is facing a crisis and the taxes reaching the sky? How will you support your family?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why is Immigration such a Big Issue?
According to the Pew Hispanic Center, in the last decade, the United States has seen a rise of 33 percent of illegal immigrants. However, as the chart shows on the right, the population of illegal immigrants peaked to 12 million in 2007 but has slowly declined to 11.2 million in 2010. These unauthorized immigrants only make up 3.7 percent of this entire nation's population.
To further reduce this number, states are taking steps to put in effect laws, similar to Arizona's, against illegal immigrants. Last year, Arizona became the first state to pass a strict immigration law, SB 1070. In Arizona, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) reported that the population of illegal immigrants reached 560,000 in 2008. However, in 2009 and 2010, after the enactment of SB 1070, the number declined to 470,000.
Throughout my research, I found the words "toughest" or "strictest" associated with Arizona's law. Well, what exactly does SB 1070 propose? First of all, it allows police officers to perform checks on a person, with "reasonable suspicions" and without warrants and to make arrests if the person does not have identification. It also makes it illegal to transport illegal immigrants and to hire them.
This law is considered highly controversial. On one side, residents of Arizona protested, boycotted some of Arizona's goods, and even received criticism from Obama. The Arizona law, he said, threatened "to undermine basic notions of fairness that we cherish as Americans, as well as the trust between police and our communities that is so crucial to keeping us safe." However, at the same, it has played a huge role in introducing laws against illegal immigrants in many twenty other states, including Alabama and Oklahoma.
Alabama also received a lot of objection when it passed its immigration law HB 56 on the ninth of July of this year. It is based off of Arizona's law, in order to execute this law, schools and businesses have to check their students' and employees' immigration status. Despite that, the thing I found most interesting was that this law is so strict that the government said that it would cut off clean water supply for a person proven an illegal. ( Picture on the left: A notice by Allgood Alabama Water Works warns unauthorized immigrants that they may lose their water supply if they do not have an Alabama ID."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now It's Oklahoma's turn!
The debate over illegal immigrants returned again this year as the Senate and the House of Representatives have both accepted House Bill 1446. But before I go on to this bill, I want to talk about an immigration law introduced back in 2007, HB 1804.
Did you know when Governor Brad Henry signed HB 1804 in 2007, it was considered the most far-reaching immigration bill in the United States? I had thought that Arizona's immigration law was thought to be the most influential, toughest, and strictest law against unauthorized immigrants. No. In fact, Oklahoma was the first state that originated this sort of law, and the name that it was given was reassigned to Alabama in 2010.
HB 1804, or Citizens and Taxpayers Protection Act, restricts the ability of illegal immigrants to obtain government IDs or public assistance. It also gives police the authority to check immigration statuses of anyone who is arrested, which can then lead to deportations.The law also violates U.S. citizens to knowingly provide shelter, transportation or employment to illegal immigrants.
Now back to the present. Oklahoma moved forward to adopt another immigration law like Arizona's. The Special Joint Immigration Reform Comittee, led by Rep. George Faught and Sen. Ron Justice, established this bill. HB 1446 stiffens the penalties for smuggling illegal immigrants and allows the government to seize property used to keep or transport unauthorized immigrants. It also allows state and local government officers to inquire about an person's immigration status, but only if the officer has a complete federal training.Although this bill was passed in both the Senate and the House, it is not seen to be enforced.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HB 1446 Passed in the Oklahoma's House of Representatives.
Fifty-Third Legislature
First Regular Session
HOUSE BILL 1446 Immigration; relating to unlawful transport of an
Faught alien; making the smuggling of human beings
YEAS: 85
Armes Fourkiller McNiel Roberts, D.
Banz Glenn McPeak Roberts, S.
Bennett Grau Moore
Billy Hall Morgan Russ
Blackwell Hardin Mulready Sanders
Brumbaugh Hickman Murphey Schwartz
Cannaday Holland
Casey Hoskin Newell Shannon
Christian Inman Nollan Stiles
Cockroft Jackson
Condit Jordan
Coody Joyner Ownbey Thomsen
Cooksey Kern Peters Tibbs
Cox Key Peterson Trebilcock
Dank Kirby Pittman Vaughan
Denney Kouplen Proctor Watson
DeWitt Lockhart Quinn Wright
Dorman Martin, Sc. Renegar Mr.Speaker
Enns Martin, St. Reynolds
Farley McCullough Richardson
Faught McDaniel, R. Ritze
NAYS: 7
McDaniel, J. Shelton
EXCUSED: 9
Brown McAffrey Sherrer
Hilliard Morrissette Shoemake
Johnson Roan Walker
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HB 1446 Passed in the Oklahoma's Senate
OKLAHOMA STATE SENATE
53rd Legislature
1st Regular Session
HOUSE BILL 1446 [Immigration; smuggling of human beings; motor
Justice vehicle penalties]
YEAS: 37
Allen Crain Justice Simpson
Anderson David Marlatt Sparks
Ballenger Ellis Mazzei Stanislawski
Barrington Fields Myers Sykes
Bingman Ford Newberry Treat
Branan Garrison Nichols Wyrick
Brecheen Halligan Reynolds
Brinkley Holt Russell
Brown Johnson, R. Schulz
NAYS: 8
Bass Eason Mc Laster Rice
Coates Johnson, C. Lerblance Wilson
EXCUSED: 3
NOT VOTING: 0
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Work Cited:
http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2011/October/11-ag-1429.html
http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2011/August/11-ag-993.html
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/705371907/ACLU-files-lawsuit-against-Utah-illegal-immigration-enforcement-law.html?pg=1
http://www.aclu.org/immigrants-rights-racial-justice/court-blocks-implementation-key-sections-arizonas-racial-profiling-
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Illegal Immigration Laws Challenged in Court
A number of states, particularly Arizona and Alabama, were challenged in court for their immigration laws. Following are three lawsuits against immigration bills that are found on ACLU's website and the United States Justice Department's.
United States vs. Arizona. Last year, this lawsuit was filed on behalf of the Departments of Justice, Homeland Security and State, and the Department of Education was also consulted. The case made it clear that although the federal government valued state assistance and cooperation to the immigration enforcement, a state could not pass their own immigration policy, especially if it contradicted with the federal government's policy. The result of this was that some parts of Arizona's immigration law was blocked.
• The requirement that police officers investigate the immigration status of all individuals
they stop if the officers suspect that they are in the country unlawfully;
• The mandatory detention of individuals who are arrested, even for minor offenses that
would normally result in a ticket, if they cannot verify that they are authorized to be in
the U.S.;
• The provision for warrantless arrest of individuals who are deemed by state or local
police officers to be "removable" from the U.S.; and
ACLU Files Lawsuit Against Utah. The ACLU and National Immigration Law Center filed the complaint on behalf of several individuals and organizations, including Utah Coalition of La Raza and the Latin American Chamber of Commerce. Lawyers this week intend to seek an injunction in U.S. District Court to stop the law from being enforced, said Karen McCreary, ACLU of Utah executive director.
United States vs. Arizona. Last year, this lawsuit was filed on behalf of the Departments of Justice, Homeland Security and State, and the Department of Education was also consulted. The case made it clear that although the federal government valued state assistance and cooperation to the immigration enforcement, a state could not pass their own immigration policy, especially if it contradicted with the federal government's policy. The result of this was that some parts of Arizona's immigration law was blocked.
• The requirement that police officers investigate the immigration status of all individuals
they stop if the officers suspect that they are in the country unlawfully;
• The mandatory detention of individuals who are arrested, even for minor offenses that
would normally result in a ticket, if they cannot verify that they are authorized to be in
the U.S.;
• The new statute imposing state criminal penalties for non-citizens failing to register
with the Department of Homeland Security or failing to carry registration documents;
• The provision for warrantless arrest of individuals who are deemed by state or local
police officers to be "removable" from the U.S.; and
• The new state statute making it a crime for alleged undocumented immigrants to
work.
The Department of Justice Challenged South Carolina. In August of 2011, the Department of Justice filed a suit against South Carolina's immigration policy stating that it was unconstitutional, and that it interfered with the federal government’s authority to set and enforce immigration policy, explaining that “the Constitution and federal law do not permit the development of a patchwork of state and local immigration policies throughout the country.” South Carolina’s law clearly conflicted with the policies set by the federal government and therefore cannot be enforced. At this point, South Carolina is unsure whether to accept this challenge or not. . But Attorney General Alan Wilson said in September that he was prepared for legal challenges, the Charleston, S.C., Post and Courier reported.
"I absolutely think this law is constitutional and absolutely think South Carolina would win," Wilson said. "This is not in contrast to the federal law. ... This is in support of the law. It absolutely puzzles me that the federal government doesn't want help.Interest groups also filed a number of lawsuits against immigration policies. Here was one of them.
ACLU Files Lawsuit Against Utah. The ACLU and National Immigration Law Center filed the complaint on behalf of several individuals and organizations, including Utah Coalition of La Raza and the Latin American Chamber of Commerce. Lawyers this week intend to seek an injunction in U.S. District Court to stop the law from being enforced, said Karen McCreary, ACLU of Utah executive director.
Work Cited:
http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2011/October/11-ag-1429.html
http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2011/August/11-ag-993.html
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/705371907/ACLU-files-lawsuit-against-Utah-illegal-immigration-enforcement-law.html?pg=1
http://www.aclu.org/immigrants-rights-racial-justice/court-blocks-implementation-key-sections-arizonas-racial-profiling-
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Statistics On Illegal Immigrants
Well, now that I have given you the basic insight of these severe immigration laws, let's move on to more important things. Do you think that we should have these laws? With first look, you would probably agree to them, like me. However, after much thorough research of the topic I have begun to question myself.
You only what the media has put forth. For example, first of all, all you hear about are Hispanics and Latinos, immigrants from Mexico. Although a majority of illegal immigrants arrive from Mexico, there are numerous other countries from where these immigrants also come. You don't hear about them, though.
The graph on the left shows that 61 percent of illegal immigrants come from Mexico, the remaining come from different parts of the world. Have you ever heard of the other 49 percent of illegal immigrants? Because surely, I haven't.The only reason Mexicans are targeted is because it is easiest for them to go across the border compared to other immigrants.
These next two graphs present statistics on the illegal immigrants in the workforce in 2008. One of the reasons why many people in the United States support these immigration laws is that they believe that unauthorized immigrants are taking jobs away from citizens in the United States. Well, I will challenge this point by the two graphs that are shown on the side. One of them talk about the number of illegal immigrants in the different occupations found here and the other presents the percent of of US born and US citizens in the workforce.
The first graph shows that majority of the illegal immigrants perform some kind of labor in their jobs. Farming, construction, installation and repair, and service occupations in general are the main jobs that illegal immigrants do. On the other, US born workers and citizens mostly have jobs in areas of business, professions, and sales. Therefore, the argument that illegal immigrants take away jobs from US citizens is now proven false. Minority of the population of US citizens works in any of the occupations that illegal immigrants do.
This next chart will show you how many people in the United States support citizenship for illegal immigrants. According to Pew Research Center, majority of Americans favor providing a way for illegals to become citizens if they pass background checks, pay their fines and taxes, have jobs. Therefore, if the government sets up a more organized system that would limit illegal immigration but create more opportunities for them to become citizens of the United States, then this problem would exist. Because, again according to Pew Research Center, 78 percent of total Americans support stronger enforcement of immigration laws. This makes sense that citizens of this country would naturally want to protect it. However, immigration laws passed in many states are not the solution. It will not help kicking immigrants out the country. America should make its immigration policy in a way that people can come here quickly and that they can afford it. That way immigrants would not have to come here illegally. Second of all, think about it. Many of these immigrants come here because they are suffering. We should hold out a helping hand for the less fortunate.
This next chart will show you how many people in the United States support citizenship for illegal immigrants. According to Pew Research Center, majority of Americans favor providing a way for illegals to become citizens if they pass background checks, pay their fines and taxes, have jobs. Therefore, if the government sets up a more organized system that would limit illegal immigration but create more opportunities for them to become citizens of the United States, then this problem would exist. Because, again according to Pew Research Center, 78 percent of total Americans support stronger enforcement of immigration laws. This makes sense that citizens of this country would naturally want to protect it. However, immigration laws passed in many states are not the solution. It will not help kicking immigrants out the country. America should make its immigration policy in a way that people can come here quickly and that they can afford it. That way immigrants would not have to come here illegally. Second of all, think about it. Many of these immigrants come here because they are suffering. We should hold out a helping hand for the less fortunate.
