A year ago, a revolution on immigration enforcement seemed underway, with legislators in at least 20 states vowing to follow the lead of Arizona’s tough new law targeting illegal immigrants.
These days, the momentum has shifted.
In at least six states, the proposals have been voted down or have simply died. Many of the other proposals have not even made it past one legislative chamber.
The most-discussed provision in the Arizona law requires police to investigate the status of people they legally stop whom they also suspect are illegal immigrants.
But even in Arizona, several tough immigration proposals have been stalled in the Senate, with business leaders and some Republicans arguing that the state does not need more controversy.
The one state whose Legislature has passed an Arizona-style law, Utah, only approved a diluted bill accompanied by another measure that goes in a dramatically different direction.
The Utah Legislature on Friday voted to create ID cards for “guest workers” and their families, provided they pay a fine and don’t commit serious crimes. Immigrants who entered the country illegally would be fined up to $2,500. Immigrants who entered the country legally but were not complying with federal immigration law would be fined $1,000.
“Why not put something in place where, in five years, we can say we did something, rather than sending a few people home?” said state Rep. Bill Wright, who wrote the law. “Sending a few people home will not solve our problems.”
Utah’s measure is essentially a state version of the comprehensive immigration reform that many backers of the Arizona approach deride as amnesty.
Muzaffar Chishti of the Migration Policy Institute said the momentum behind Arizona’s law was similar to the motivations driving Republican campaigns during the 2010 election and a bevy of new “tea party” -backed legislators eager to make their mark.
“There was a strong newcomer’s enthusiasm for this,” Chishti said. “Now I think reality has set in.”
The main factor behind the retreat is skittishness about costs, said Ann Morse, who tracks immigration legislation for the National Conference of State Legislatures.
Arizona was sued by the Obama administration, which secured an injunction against most of the law. That ruling is under appeal and expected to reach the Supreme Court, costing millions in legal fees. Arizona was also hit by boycotts and canceled conventions.
“Most states are looking at where to cut money, not where to spend money,” Morse said.
There’s still time for the dynamic to change. Laws partly modeled on Arizona’s SB 1070 have made their way out of one of the two chambers in legislatures in Indiana, Kentucky and Georgia.
But the situation in Georgia symbolizes why it has been difficult to pass Arizona-style laws. Gov.Nathan Deal, a Republican, campaigned on bringing such legislation to Georgia, but allies accuse him of equivocating because he hasn’t vowed to sign the proposal that passed the state House of Representatives on Thursday.
Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies in Washington said it’s not surprising that efforts to replicate SB 1070 face uphill battles. Such laws spark fierce opposition from businesses, police and immigration advocates.
The issue gained traction in Arizona, Krikorian said, because illegal immigration was viewed as such a serious problem there. But elsewhere, “there’s no business with full-time employees trying to get immigration laws enforced. In fact, the opposite is true.”
“Any progress at all surprises me,” he added.
Source: Les Angeles Times: