States unmoved by SB 1070 backlash

In the year since Republican Gov. Jan Brewer signed the nation's toughest immigration measure into law, Arizona has been besieged by protests, boycotts and a barrage of negative headlines - not to mention a lawsuit from the Obama administration.

But that hasn't deterred a handful of other states from following Arizona's lead.

The Justice Department sued over the law, prompting a federal judge to block the most controversial parts of Arizona's SB 1070 before they could take effect, a decision upheld by an appellate court earlier this month.

While those rulings may have convinced many states to abandon similar Arizona-style immigration bills this session, others are plowing ahead with their own legislation targeting illegal immigrants.

Their message is simple: If Washington won't fix the broken immigration system and secure the border, states will.

The Florida House is weighing a bill that would allow local law enforcement to check the immigration status of people who are under investigation or who they suspect are in the country illegally.

In Alabama, the House and Senate are reconciling bills that would give state and local police broad authority to check the citizenship of people stopped for other reasons. The South Carolina Senate approved similar legislation. And Georgia GOP Gov. Nathan Deal is expected to sign a similar immigration bill that recently cleared the legislature.

"This is a critically important issue that we felt needed to be dealt with this year," said state Rep. Matt Ramsey, a Peachtree City Republican who wrote the Georgia bill. "The day that we stop addressing tough issues because of threats from the ACLU is the day that we've completely abdicated our responsibility as state policymakers."

The American Civil Liberties Union, one of a handful of groups that sued Arizona last year to block the law from taking effect, has vowed to legally challenge states that attempt to pass so-called "copycat" immigration legislation. And other SB 1070 opponents are warning cash-strapped states that they'll have to dig deep into their coffers to defend the laws.

"It's rather stunning when you think about it: These states will have to deal with lawsuits. They will have to spend millions of dollars defending these laws in court. They're going to bear the brunt in the loss of reputation and tourism and convention dollars," said Ali Noorani, executive director of the National Immigration Forum, an immigration advocacy group based in Washington, D.C.

In the wake of SB 1070's enactment, cities and organizations across the country signed on to an economic boycott of Arizona. Groups, including the Service Employees International Union and the National Association of Legal Professionals, announced they wouldn't set foot in Arizona, while the National Urban League nixed its 2012 conference in Phoenix.

A study last fall, commissioned by the liberal Center for American Progress and conducted by respected Arizona economist Elliott D. Pollack, found that the Grand Canyon State lost more than $140 million from canceled conventions and conferences.

But Ramsey argued that the financial burden of providing health care and public education to illegal immigrants is much heavier. He cited a report by the Federation for American Immigration Reform, an anti-immigration group, that said Georgia schools pays $1.5 billion each year to educate K-12 undocumented children. The study, however, included U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants, who are technically citizens.



"We in the states are struggling financially to deal with this crushing burden that's being placed on us by the federal government's complete and total abdication of their responsibility to secure the nation's borders," Ramsey said.



Brewer signed SB 1070 into law on April 23, 2010, against the backdrop of the politically charged 2010 campaign, an act that transformed the GOP governor overnight into a national hero of the right and the chief villain of Hispanic and pro-immigration groups.



President Barack Obama dismissed the law as "misguided," and his Justice Department sued last July to stop it, arguing that immigration enforcement falls under the power of the federal government, not states.



A federal district judge ruled that several of the law's most controversial provisions - including one requiring police to check the citizenship status of anyone suspected of being an illegal immigrant, and another making it a state crime to be in the country illegally - were unconstitutional. A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that decision earlier this month.



But Brewer has stood her ground, counter-suing the federal government for failing to secure the border and vowing to take her fight to the Supreme Court.



In a statement marking the one-year anniversary of SB 1070, Brewer said national support for the legislation has been strong, measured by public polls and nearly $4 million in private donations for the law's legal defense fund. Arizona's actions - and the national attention that followed - have put pressure on Obama to secure the border and prompted his decision last May to deploy 1,200 National Guard troops to the Southwest border, Brewer said.



"Arizona has been more than patient in waiting for Washington to take concrete steps to stem the flow of illegal immigration," Brewer said. "After decades of federal inaction and misguided policy, I and the Legislature had no choice but to stand up for the rule of law and the citizens of this great country. Arizona is willing to do the job that the federal government won't do."



Obama administration officials have argued that the border is safer than ever, noting that border patrol apprehensions - a key indicator for illegal immigration activity - are down significantly, and seizures of illegal currency, drugs and weapons are up.



Last week at the White House, the president showed renewed interest in comprehensive immigration reform, challenging key stakeholders to help him pass a plan that would beef up border security and offer a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants.



"There's no reason why we shouldn't be able to achieve a system that is fair, is equitable, is an economic engine for America that helps the people who are already here get acculturated, and make sure that our laws aren't being broken but we're still true to our traditions," Obama said during a stop in California last week.

The courts ultimately will settle the constitutionality debate - and Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.) predicted they'll confirm the law "is unconstitutional, it's unfair, it's prejudiced, it's biased and it is un-American," he told hundreds of pro-immigration activists after leading an anti-SB 1070 march last weekend at the Arizona Capitol in Phoenix.



Other states are heeding that warning. Already this legislative session, similar immigration bills have failed in at least 10 states, including California, Kansas, Nebraska and New Hampshire. Utah passed an omnibus immigration bill that couples strict Arizona-style measures with a guest worker program - a provision that prompted House Judiciary Committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) to urge the Justice Department to sue the state.



Meanwhile, states pressing forward with anti-immigration legislation are studying the legal pitfalls that have ensnared the Arizona law, ensuring they don't suffer a similar fate.



Last week, the Alabama Senate passed a bill that would require police officers to verify someone's immigration status when they stop them for another infraction, if they have suspicion that person is in the country illegally. The bill also would make it illegal to employ, harbor or transport an illegal immigrant, and would require businesses with more than 25 employees to use the federal E-Verify online system to check the immigration status of workers.



The House-passed bill is similar but would only require businesses to use E-Verify if they receive state contracts or grants.



With lawsuits on the horizon, Republican Gov. Robert Bentley urged House and Senate negotiators to iron out their differences and send him legislation that will withstand legal scrutiny.



"We need a bill that's not only strong but one that's defendable," Bentley said, according to the Birmingham News. "If it goes to court, we'll have to defend it."