Two recent immigration issues illustrate the commitment that the federal government has to ensure that the states do not try to pass laws regarding immigration. The position of the federal government is correctly stated and supported by the United States Constitution which gives the federal government the exclusive right to manage and control immigration. Those constitutional principles prohibit the state governments from passing laws regarding immigration.
The first of these actions by the federal government involves a lawsuit that the federal Department of Justice filed against the State of Alabama to stop the implementation of a recent anti-immigrant law in that state. That Alabama law, HB 56, requires police officers to verify the immigration status of people they “suspect are illegal immigrants”. It also makes it a crime to work or solicit work in that state. The law prohibits landlords from renting to undocumented immigrants and makes them ineligible to receive state and local government benefits including attendance at public colleges and universities.
The law is scheduled to become effective on September 1, 2011. The federal lawsuit states that the Alabama law “exceeds the state’s role with respect to aliens, interferes with the federal government’s balanced administration of the immigration laws, and critically undermines U. S. foreign policy objectives.” Federal officials insist that this law will result in harassment and incarceration of lawfully admitted immigrants and U. S. citizens who will be unable to provide proof of their status on the spot.
The second federal action is strongly opposed by immigrant rights and civil liberties organizations as being harmful and unfair to immigrants. But once again the position of the federal government is that the states have no authority to do anything that affects immigration. In 2008, the federal government established the “Secure Communities Program”. The states, counties and cities were asked to sign agreements with the federal government which would require them to send the fingerprints of everyone arrested for felonies (serious crimes) to Immigration authorities.
Only 11 states declined to sign agreements. The program soon created an enormous amount of criticism by community organizations, churches, civic organizations and even major police departments. The primary concern is that victims and witnesses of crimes will be unwilling to report crimes and criminals to the police and to testify in court, fearing that police officers will give their names to immigration agents. The Governors of California and other states have complained that the program has erroneously reported thousands of people for minor offenses and those that were ultimately not guilty.
As a result, many of the states that signed the agreement decided to terminate it. The federal government has sent letters to the governors of the 39 states that signed agreements informing them that their agreement is not necessary and that they will be required to comply with the terms of the program. The states have a strong argument that the U. S. Constitution gives states the right to conduct law enforcement activities.