DOCSLIB.ORG

1 U.S. COMMISSION on CIVIL RIGHTS 1 * * * * * 2 PUBLIC FIELD BRIEFING 3 * * * * * 4 FRIDAY, AUGUST 17, 2012 5 * * * * * 6 the Co

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
1 U.S. COMMISSION on CIVIL RIGHTS 1 * * * * * 2 PUBLIC FIELD BRIEFING 3 * * * * * 4 FRIDAY, AUGUST 17, 2012 5 * * * * * 6 the Co 1 1 U.S. COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS 2 * * * * * 3 PUBLIC FIELD BRIEFING 4 * * * * * 5 FRIDAY, AUGUST 17, 2012 6 * * * * * 7 The Commission convened at the Sheraton 8 Birmingham Hotel in the Birmingham Ballroom, 2101 9 Richard Arrington Jr. Boulevard North, Birmingham, 10 Alabama at 9:02 a.m., MARTIN R. CASTRO, Chairman, 11 presiding. 12 PRESENT: 13 MARTIN R. CASTRO, Chairman 14 ROBERTA ACHTENBERG, Commissioner 15 TODD F. GAZIANO, Commissioner 16 GAIL L. HERIOT, Commissioner 17 PETER N. KIRSANOW, Commissioner 18 DAVID KLADNEY, Commissioner 19 MICHAEL YAKI, Commissioner 20 21 22 23 24 25 2 1 STAFF PRESENT: 2 PAMELA DUNSTON, Chief, ASCD 3 ANGELICA TREVINO 4 LENORE OSTROWSKY 5 MICHELE YORKMAN RAMEY 6 VANESSA EISEMANN, Attorney 7 YASMIN ELHADY, Attorney 8 FAYE ROBINSON 9 COMMISSIONER ASSISTANTS PRESENT: 10 NICHOLAS COLTEN 11 ALEC DEULL 12 CARISSA MULDER 13 JOHN MARTIN 14 MARLENE SALLO 15 ALISON SCHMAUCH 16 RICHARD SCHMECHEL 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 3 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 2 AGENDA ITEM PAGE 3 I. Introductory Remarks by Chairman 7 4 II. Remarks by Commissioner Gaziano 16 5 III. Remarks by Commissioner Yaki 20 6 IV. Panel One Speakers 7 - Kris Kobach, Secretary of State, 24 8 Kansas 9 - Chris England, Representative, 37 10 Alabama House of Representatives 11 - Scott Beason, Senator, Alabama 42 12 Senate 13 - Stacy Abrams, House Minority Leader 48 14 for the Georgia General Assembly 15 V. Questions by Commissioners 54 16 VI. Panel Two Speakers 17 - Tammy Besherse, South Carolina 115 18 Appleseed Legal Justice Center 19 - Chris Chmielenski, NumbersUSA 120 20 - Chuck Ellis, Councilman, City of 127 21 Albertville, Alabama 22 - William Lawrence, Principal, Foley 134 23 Elementary School, Alabama 24 - Steve Marshall, District Attorney, 139 25 Marshall County, Alabama 4 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd.) 2 AGENDA ITEM PAGE 3 - Isabel Rubio, Executive Director, 146 4 Hispanic Interest Coalition of Alabama 5 VII. Questions by Commissioners 152 6 VIII. Panel Three Speakers 7 - Marie Provine, Professor, Arizona 181 8 State University 9 - Carol Swain, Professor, Vanderbilt 187 10 University 11 - Mark Krikorian, Director, Center 190 12 for Immigration Studies 13 - Michele Waslin, American Immigration 196 14 Council 15 - Dan Stein, President, Federation for 203 16 American Immigration Reform 17 - Victor Viramontes, Mexican American 209 18 Legal Defense and Educational Fund 19 - Mary Bauer, Legal Director, Southern 214 20 Poverty Law Center 21 IX. Questions by Commissioners 224 22 X. Panel Four Speakers 23 - Joseph Knippenberg, Georgia SAC and 270 24 Professor, Oglethorpe University 25 5 1 2 6 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd.) 2 AGENDA ITEM PAGE 3 - Jerry Gonzalez, Georgia SAC and 277 4 Executive Director, Georgia Assn. of 5 Latino Elected Officials 6 - Joanne Milner, Utah SAC Chair and 283 7 Office of Mayor, Salt Lake City Corp. 8 XI. Remarks by Audience Members 9 - Leticia Ramirez 304 10 - Hina Nihal 305 11 XII. Adjournment 313 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 7 1 E X H I B I T S 2 EXHIBIT NO. DESCRIPTION 3 1 Five Facts About Undocumented Workers 4 in the United States, 2008, NCLR 5 2 Immigration Myths and Facts 6 3 Valle del Sol, et al vs Michael B. 7 Whiting, et al, CV-10-01061-PHX-SRB, 8 Filed 7-17-12 9 4 Declaration of Daniel Pochoda with 10 Attachments, ACLU Foundation of 11 Arizona 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 8 1 PROCEEDINGS 2 August 17, 2012 9:02 a.m. 3 CHAIRMAN CASTRO: Welcome. The meeting 4 will come to order. I'm Chairman Marty Castro of 5 the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. I wish to 6 welcome everyone to our meeting here on the issue of 7 the civil rights implications of current state law 8 on immigration enforcement laws. It is now 9:02 9 a.m. on August 17, 2012. 10 The purpose of this briefing is to 11 analyze whether recently enacted state immigration 12 enforcement laws have adversely impacted the civil 13 rights of both U.S. citizens and noncitizen 14 immigrants. The purpose of this briefing is to 15 examine whether or not the recently enacted state 16 immigration laws foster discrimination or contribute 17 to an increase in hate crimes, cause elevated racial 18 or ethnic profiling, impact students' rights under 19 Plyler versus Doe or compromise the public safety or 20 community policing. 21 The United States Commission on Civil 22 Rights was created in 1957 as an independent, 23 bipartisan, fact-finding federal agency. Our 24 mission is to inform the development of national 25 civil rights policies and enhance enforcement of 9 1 civil rights laws. We prepare reports on those 2 topics to the President and the United States 3 Congress for them to take action on the issues that 4 we develop. 5 As Lyndon Johnson, then-Senate Majority 6 Leader, said in 1957, “the Commission is to gather 7 facts instead of charges. It can sift out the truth 8 from the fancies, and it can return with 9 recommendations that will be of assistance to 10 reasonable men.” 11 Speaking for the democratic members of 12 this panel, I can say that there are organizations 13 here today whose views we strongly oppose. These 14 are groups that we did not invite but were added to 15 the panel by our career staff upon recommendations 16 from our conservative commissioners. No doubt our 17 conservative colleagues can say that there are 18 groups here that were invited on recommendations 19 from the democrats whose views -- with whose views 20 they strongly disagree. 21 Speaking for myself personally as the 22 son and grandson of Mexican immigrants, as someone 23 who has been personally disparaged during the course 24 of my life with racial and ethnic epithets, whose 25 ten-year-old son was bullied at the beginning of the 10 1 last school year in Illinois because he was 2 perceived to be undocumented; and as the first 3 Latino chair of this Commission, 4 upon the appointment of myself by 5 President Obama to this Commission, I can tell you 6 that I strongly oppose the views of some of today's 7 speakers. 8 In fact, if I had the sole authority 9 and the ability to invite all the panelists for 10 today's briefing -- which is not how this Commission 11 works -- it would look very different. But that is 12 not how the process here works. However, every one 13 of today's panelists has a First Amendment right. 14 Peaceful protesters are exercising those same First 15 Amendment rights today. And I want to thank them 16 for being here and expressing their view, and I want 17 them to know that many of us on this issue are in 18 solidarity. 19 Immigration is a topic that inspires 20 both passion and controversy. This is a topic that 21 is at the forefront of the national discourse. The 22 civil rights aspect of the state immigration 23 enforcement laws was left unanswered by the Supreme 24 Court in its recent ruling in the Arizona case. 25 This is the type of topic our Commission should 11 1 be addressing, and I'm glad we're doing it and that 2 it has excited so much passion and activism, as have 3 many other important issues in the agency's storied 4 history. 5 Our enacting statute has tasked this 6 Commission with an investigative, fact-finding 7 mission to report accurate civil rights information 8 to the President and Congress. In order to fulfill 9 this mission, our agency should aim to protect 10 important constitutional rights, all while 11 maintaining impartiality to hear different opinions 12 on the important civil rights matters in our great 13 nation. If we do not allow constitutionally 14 protected speech -- we do not necessarily agree with 15 an opinion or view -- we are doing a disservice to 16 the fact-finding mission upon which this Commission 17 was originally founded. 18 Today we find ourselves in Birmingham, 19 Alabama to examine the civil rights impact of the 20 state level immigration enforcement laws here and in 21 other states like Georgia, South Carolina, Utah and 22 Arizona. We are in Alabama today for our first 23 field briefing outside of Washington in many years, 24 and it's apropos for us to be here since the very 25 first field briefing of the Commission was held in 12 1 Alabama in 1958. We're coming full circle. So 2 we're here now in Birmingham for many reasons, but 3 today, most of all, because of Birmingham's history 4 as the center of the civil rights struggle of the 5 past and today it's at the epicenter of a new civil 6 rights struggle by immigrant communities. 7 Yesterday many of us toured to 16th 8 Street Baptist Church and the Birmingham Civil 9 Rights Institute, and it confirmed, in my mind, that 10 Birmingham is indeed a symbol of the fact that 11 oppression can be overcome. 12 In my opinion, the Commission's role in 13 that struggle against oppression is to shine our 14 historic light, not only on the wrongs but upon why 15 and how they have been created so that the President 16 and Congress understand how to dismantle those walls 17 of oppression and open the promise that this country 18 has made to each and every one of us.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Order Granting Preliminary Injunction
    IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION CENTRAL ALABAMA FAIR ) HOUSING CENTER, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) CIVIL ACTION NO. v. ) 2:11cv982-MHT ) (WO) JULIE MAGEE, in her ) official capacity as ) Alabama Revenue ) Commissioner, and ) JIMMY STUBBS, in his ) official capacity as ) Elmore County Probate ) Judge, ) ) Defendants. ) OPINION This lawsuit is a challenge to the application of § 30 of the Beason-Hammon Alabama Taxpayer and Citizen Protection Act (commonly referred to as “HB 56”), 2011 Ala. Laws 535, which, when combined with another Alabama statute, essentially prohibits individuals who cannot prove their citizenship status from staying in their manufactured homes. The plaintiffs are the Central Alabama Fair Housing Center, the Fair Housing Center of Northern Alabama, the Center for Fair Housing, Inc., and two individuals proceeding under pseudonym as John Doe #1 and John Doe #2. The defendants are Julie Magee, in her official capacity as Alabama Revenue Commissioner, and Jimmy Stubbs, in his official capacity as Elmore County Probate Judge. The plaintiffs claim, among other things, that this application of HB 56 violates the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution (as enforced through 42 U.S.C. § 1983) and the Fair Housing Act (“FHA”), 42 U.S.C. § 3604. The jurisdiction of the court has been invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1343. This as-applied challenge to HB 56 is now before the court on the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction. As explained below, the motion will be granted. 2 I. BACKGROUND A. Passage of HB 56 In June 2011, the Alabama legislature passed a comprehensive and far-reaching state immigration law: HB 56.
    [Show full text]
  • Fixing Alabama's Public School Enrollment Requirements in H.B. 56: Eliminating Obstacles to an Education for Unauthorized Immigrant Children
    Brigham Young University Education and Law Journal Volume 2014 Number 2 Article 4 Summer 6-1-2014 Fixing Alabama's Public School Enrollment Requirements in H.B. 56: Eliminating Obstacles to an Education for Unauthorized Immigrant Children Sean Mussey Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.byu.edu/elj Part of the Education Commons, Education Law Commons, and the Immigration Law Commons Recommended Citation Sean Mussey, Fixing Alabama's Public School Enrollment Requirements in H.B. 56: Eliminating Obstacles to an Education for Unauthorized Immigrant Children, 2014 BYU Educ. & L.J. 233 (2014). Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.byu.edu/elj/vol2014/iss2/4 . This Article is brought to you for free and open access by BYU Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Brigham Young University Education and Law Journal by an authorized editor of BYU Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Mussey Macro.docx (Do Not Delete) 5/28/14 3:45 PM FIXING ALABAMA’S PUBLIC SCHOOL ENROLLMENT REQUIREMENTS IN H.B. 56: ELIMINATING OBSTACLES TO AN EDUCATION FOR UNAUTHORIZED IMMIGRANT CHILDREN Sean Mussey∗ I. INTRODUCTION In 2011, Alabama enacted a comprehensive immigration law primarily aimed at addressing unauthorized immigration in the state.1 The Beason-Hammon Alabama Taxpayer Citizen and Protection Act (H.B. 56) impacts many areas of an unauthorized immigrant’s life, including law enforcement, transportation, housing, employment, and children’s participation in public schools.2
    [Show full text]
  • Breaking Down the Thousand Petty Fortresses of State Self-Deportation Laws
    Pace Law Review Volume 34 Issue 2 Spring 2014 Article 7 April 2014 The Right to Travel: Breaking Down the Thousand Petty Fortresses of State Self-Deportation Laws R. Linus Chan University of Minnesota Law School Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.pace.edu/plr Part of the Constitutional Law Commons, Immigration Law Commons, and the State and Local Government Law Commons Recommended Citation R. Linus Chan, The Right to Travel: Breaking Down the Thousand Petty Fortresses of State Self- Deportation Laws, 34 Pace L. Rev. 814 (2014) Available at: https://digitalcommons.pace.edu/plr/vol34/iss2/7 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the School of Law at DigitalCommons@Pace. It has been accepted for inclusion in Pace Law Review by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@Pace. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Right to Travel: Breaking Down the Thousand Petty Fortresses of State Self- Deportation Laws R. Linus Chan* Introduction The vanishing began Wednesday night, the most frightened families packing up their cars as soon as they heard the news. They left behind mobile homes, sold fully furnished for a thousand dollars or even less. Or they just closed up and, in a gesture of optimism, left the keys with a neighbor. Dogs were fed one last time; if no home could be found, they were simply unleashed. Two, [five], [ten] years of living here, and then gone in a matter of days, to Tennessee, Illinois, Oregon, Florida, Arkansas, Mexico—who knows? Anywhere but Alabama.1 This mass exodus from Albertville, Alabama was not the result of a natural disaster or fears of an invasion by hostile forces.
    [Show full text]
  • 2019 Utah State of Children's Coverage Report
    2019 UTAH STATE OF CHILDREN’S COVERAGE REPORT 100% Kids: Giving All Kids the Opportunity to Thrive Table of Contents Executive Summary......................................................................... 1 Introduction ...................................................................................... 6 Why Health Insurance Matters ........................................................ 3 Health Insurance Disparities............................................................ 5 Why Are Children Uninsured? ......................................................... 6 Immigrant Children and Health Insurance ...................................... 8 Health Insurance Barriers Faced by Immigrant Families............... 12 100% Kids Coverage Campaign and Recommendations ............. 13 Conclusion ..................................................................................... 16 100% Kids Coalition Endorsements .............................................. 17 Appendix 1: In Their Own Words: Growing Up Without Health Insurance ........ 18 Appendix 2: In Their Own Words: How Insurance Affects Family Well-Being ... 18 Endnotes ....................................................................................... 20 Acknowledgements ....................................................................... 21 Note: The testimonies and stories throughout the report come directly from immigrant families who have benefited from CHIP and Medicaid, or could benefit if coverage was extended to all children regardless of immigration status. All
    [Show full text]
  • The Anti-Immigrant Game
    Op-Ed The anti-immigrant game Laws such as Arizona's SB 1070 are not natural responses to undue hardship but are products of partisan politics. Opponents of SB 1070 raise their fists after unfurling an enormous banner from the beam of a 30-story high construction crane in downtown Phoenix, Arizona in 2010. If upheld, Arizona's SB 1070 would require local police in most circumstances to determine the immigration status of anyone they stop based only on a reasonable suspicion that the person is unlawfully in this country. (Los Angeles Times / April 23, 2012) By Pratheepan Gulasekaram and Karthick Ramakrishnan April 24, 2012 The Supreme Court hears oral arguments Wednesday on the constitutionality of Arizona's 2010 immigration enforcement law. If upheld, SB 1070 would require local police in most circumstances to determine the immigration status of anyone they stop based only on a reasonable suspicion that the person is unlawfully in this country. It would also compel residents to carry their immigration papers at all times and create state immigration crimes distinct from what is covered by federal law. A few other states, such as Alabama and Georgia, and some cities have passed similar laws, and many more may consider such laws if the Supreme Court finds Arizona's law to be constitutional. The primary legal debate in U.S. vs. Arizona will focus on the issue of whether a state government can engage in immigration enforcement without the explicit consent of the federal government. The state of Arizona will argue that its measure simply complements federal enforcement, while the federal government will argue that Arizona's law undermines national authority and that immigration enforcement is an exclusively federal responsibility.
    [Show full text]
  • State Versus Federal Government in the Regulation of Immigration: Examining the Constitutionality of Arizona and Alabama’S Immigration Laws
    San Jose State University SJSU ScholarWorks Master's Projects Master's Theses and Graduate Research Spring 2012 State Versus Federal Government in the Regulation of Immigration: Examining the Constitutionality of Arizona and Alabama’s Immigration Laws Sadaf Siddiq San Jose State University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/etd_projects Part of the Public Administration Commons Recommended Citation Siddiq, Sadaf, "State Versus Federal Government in the Regulation of Immigration: Examining the Constitutionality of Arizona and Alabama’s Immigration Laws" (2012). Master's Projects. 220. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31979/etd.dkd2-qf4w https://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/etd_projects/220 This Master's Project is brought to you for free and open access by the Master's Theses and Graduate Research at SJSU ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master's Projects by an authorized administrator of SJSU ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Siddiq 1 State Versus Federal Government in the Regulation of Immigration: Examining the Constitutionality of Arizona and Alabama’s Immigration Laws San Jose State University Master’s of Public Administration Program By: Sadaf Siddiq Advisor: Professor Kenneth Nuger Siddiq 2 Introduction Immigration issues have caused great debate amongst community members. In particular lawmakers, politicians, interest groups, and civil rights activists have been vocal in voicing their concerns. It is estimated that there are currently ten to eleven million undocumented immigrants in the United States (Immigration Policy Center, 2010). Immigration issues arise from concerns regarding the insufficient number of visas that are available to bring both high and less skilled workers into the country legally to meet the changing needs of the country’s economy and labor market, separation of family members, wage and workplace violations, and lack of an efficient government infrastructure that delays the integration of immigrants who seek to become citizens (Immigration Policy Center, 2010).
    [Show full text]
  • THE IMPACT of LEGISLATION HOUSE BILL 56 on IMMIGRATION LAWS and CONSTRUCTION in ALABAMA a Thesis by JOSE GARCIA Submitted to Th
    THE IMPACT OF LEGISLATION HOUSE BILL 56 ON IMMIGRATION LAWS AND CONSTRUCTION IN ALABAMA A Thesis by JOSE GARCIA Submitted to the Office of Graduate Studies of Texas A&M University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Chair of Committee, David Bilbo Committee Members, Cecilia Giusti Edelmiro Escamilla Head of Department, Joe Horlen August 2013 Major Subject: Construction Management Copyright 2013 Jose Garcia ABSTRACT Historically the United States has welcomed immigration from all over the world; from Ellis Island to the Statue of Liberty, whose iconic “Mother of Exiles” is considered a symbol of hope to generations upon generations of immigrants. In the last few years there has been an increase in hostility towards immigration but more precisely towards unauthorized immigration. This has caused several states to enact anti- unauthorized immigration measures. States such as South Carolina, Utah, Alabama, have all followed Arizona, which was the first state to enact such a laws. Unauthorized immigrants typically vacate three labor areas, construction, food service, and agriculture. The following thesis tries to detail House Bill 56, which is Alabama’s anti-unauthorized immigration bill, and its impact on the construction industry in Alabama. House Bill 56 was passed by the Alabama House of Representatives, the following research shows that it has negatively affected the construction industry in Alabama. Alabama has three major indexes that detail the overall “health” of the construction industry. They are employment rates, Construction GDP, and Construction Spending. Since the passage of HB 56, all three construction indexes in Alabama have encountered significant negative changes.
    [Show full text]
  • Harvard Kennedy School Journal of Hispanic Policy a Harvard Kennedy School Student Publication
    Harvard Kennedy School Journal of Hispanic Policy A Harvard Kennedy School Student Publication Volume 30 Staff Kristell Millán Editor-in-Chief Estivaliz Castro Senior Editor Alberto I. Rincon Executive Director Bryan Cortes Senior Editor Leticia Rojas Managing Editor, Print Jazmine Garcia Delgadillo Senior Amanda R. Matos Managing Editor, Editor Digital Daniel Gonzalez Senior Editor Camilo Caballero Director, Jessica Mitchell-McCollough Senior Communications Editor Rocio Tua Director, Alumni & Board Noah Toledo Senior Editor Relations Max Wynn Senior Editor Sara Agate Senior Editor Martha Foley Publisher Elizabeth Castro Senior Editor Richard Parker Faculty Advisor Recognition of Former Editors A special thank you to the former editors Alex Rodriguez, 1995–96 of the Harvard Kennedy School Journal of Irma Muñoz, 1996–97 Hispanic Policy, previously known as the Myrna Pérez, 1996–97 Harvard Journal of Hispanic Policy, whose Eraina Ortega, 1998–99 legacy continues to be a source of inspira- Nereyda Salinas, 1998–99 tion for Latina/o students Harvard-wide. Raúl Ruiz, 1999–2000 Maurilio León, 1999–2000 Henry A.J. Ramos, Founding Editor, Sandra M. Gallardo, 2000–01 1984–86 Luis S. Hernandez Jr., 2000–01 Marlene M. Morales, 1986–87 Karen Hakime Bhatia, 2001–02 Adolph P. Falcón, 1986–87 Héctor G. Bladuell, 2001–02 Kimura Flores, 1987–88 Jimmy Gomez, 2002–03 Luis J. Martinez, 1988–89 Elena Chávez, 2003–04 Genoveva L. Arellano, 1989–90 Adrian J. Rodríguez, 2004–05 David Moguel, 1989–90 Edgar A. Morales, 2005–06 Carlo E. Porcelli, 1990–91 Maria C. Alvarado, 2006–07 Laura F. Sainz, 1990–91 Tomás J. García, 2007–08 Diana Tisnado, 1991–92 Emerita F.
    [Show full text]
  • Tools for Leaders: Hope and Hospitality 6OJUFE.FUIPEJTU8PNFOT)PQFBOE)PTQJUBMJUZ
    Tools for Leaders: Hope and Hospitality 6OJUFE.FUIPEJTU8PNFOt)PQFBOE)PTQJUBMJUZ © 2012 United Methodist Women Immigrant and Civil Rights Initiative United Methodist Women 777 United Nations Plaza, 11th floor New York, NY 10017 Tel: 212-682-3633 www.unitedmethodistwomen.org immigration.umwonline.net www.facebook.com/groups/UMWimmigration This manual and material from this manual may be reproduced without adaptation for non- commercial purposes provided the following notice appears with the excerpted material: From Hope and Hospitality: An Immigration Resource Guide © 2012 United Methodist Women. All rights reserved. Used by permission. Articles from response magazine should also include the article title, author name, and year and date of issue along with © response magazine. This resource is for United Methodist Women at the local, district, conference and national levels. Materials are also available online at unitedmethodistwomen.org/act/immigration, or contact your conference Immigration Task Force. For further information contact the United Methodist Women Immigrant and Civil Rights initiative at the Church Center for the United Na- tions, 777 United Nations Plaza, 11th floor, New York, NY 10017, telephone 212-682-3633, e-mail [email protected]. All biblical quotations, unless otherwise noted, are from the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) of the Bible, copyright © 1989, by the Division of Christian Education of the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the United States of America. Used by permission. All rights reserved. Scripture taken from The Message copyright © 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 2000, 2001, 2002. Used by permission of NavPress Publishing Group. Quotes from the The Book of Discipline of The United Methodist Church—2008 copyright © 2008 by The United Methodist Publishing House.
    [Show full text]
  • The Expected Impact of State Immigration Legislation on Labor
    The Expected Impact of State Julie L. Hotchkiss Immigration Legislation on Myriam Quispe-Agnoli Labor Market Outcomes Abstract In response to the dramatic rise in the number of unauthorized immigrants to the United States, every state has passed some form of immigration legislation. These laws appear to be predicated on a belief that unauthorized immigrants impose greater costs than benefits to state and local communities, including the labor market. The purpose of this paper is to examine some evidence on what workers should expect if the im- migration legislation is successful in eliminating undocumented workers from states’ labor markets. C 2012 by the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management. INTRODUCTION “The State of Alabama [Oklahoma] finds that illegal immigration is causing economic hardshipandlawlessnessinthisstate...” Alabama HB 56 (http://www.ncsl.org/documents/statefed/AlabamaH56.pdf) [Oklahoma HB 1804 (http://ssl.csg.org/dockets/29cycle/29A/2009adocketbills/ 1929A04ok.pdf)] “The legislature declares that the intent of this act is to make attrition through en- forcement the public policy of all state and local government agencies in Arizona. The provisions of this act are intended to work together to discourage and deter the unlawful entry and presence of aliens and economic activity by persons unlawfully present in the United States.” Arizona SB 1070 (http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/49leg/2r/bills/sb1070s.pdf) “Illegal immigration matters.” Indiana SB 590 (http://www.in.gov/legislative/bills/2011/PDF/IN/IN0590.1.pdf) According the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL), state legislative interest in immigration issues spiked in 2005, when 300 immigration bills were introduced into state legislatures; 39 of them survived to become law that year.1 Activity nearly doubled in 2006, then exploded in 2007 with 1,562 bills introduced and 240 becoming law.
    [Show full text]
  • Over the Wall
    OVER THE WALL Law, Human Development, and the Migrant Communities Michael C. Hagerty of the Arizona Borderlands Arizona’s struggle with undocumented migration exists within the context of a Notre Dame Law School massive intra-continental human migration. A broad and complex range of Program on Law and Human Development economic factors have led millions of Mexicans and Central Americans north to the United States in search of the “American dream.” April 2012 w Notre Dame Program on Law and Human Development Student Research Papers # 2012-1 Program on Law and Human Development Notre Dame Law School's Program on Law and Human Development provided guidance and support for this report; generous funding came from the Helen Kellogg Institute for International Studies at the University of Notre Dame. The author remains solely responsible for the substantive content. Permission is granted to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use, provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and a full citation on the first page. The proper form for citing Research Papers in this series is: Author, Title (Notre Dame Program on Law and Human Development Student Research Papers #, Year). ISSN (online): 2165-1477 © Michael C. Hagerty Notre Dame Law School Notre Dame, IN 46556 USA Over the Wall About the author During the summer of 2011, Michael Hagerty (Candidate for Juris Doctor 2013, B.A. Williams 2008) used Tucson as his base for the exploration of migration issues in the Arizona-Sonora border region.
    [Show full text]
  • Union Calendar No. 443
    1 Union Calendar No. 443 109TH CONGRESS " ! REPORT 2d Session HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 109–741 REPORT ON LEGISLATIVE AND OVERSIGHT ACTIVITIES of the HOUSE COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY together with ADDITIONAL VIEWS ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION 2006 (Pursuant to House Rule XI, 1(d)) JANUARY 2, 2007.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union and ordered to be printed. U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 59–006 WASHINGTON : 2007 VerDate Aug 31 2005 22:19 Jan 10, 2007 Jkt 059006 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4012 Sfmt 4012 E:\HR\OC\HR741.XXX HR741 rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with HEARING E:\Seals\Congress.#13 VerDate Aug 31 2005 22:19 Jan 10, 2007 Jkt 059006 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4012 Sfmt 4012 E:\HR\OC\HR741.XXX HR741 rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with HEARING LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY, Washington, DC, January 2, 2007. Hon. KAREN HAAS, Clerk of the House of Representatives, The Capitol, Washington, DC. DEAR MS. HAAS: Pursuant to clause 1(d)(1) of Rule XI and Rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives, here is a report of the legislative and oversight activities of the Committee on Home- land Security during the 109th Congress. Sincerely, PETER T. KING, Chairman. (III) VerDate Aug 31 2005 22:19 Jan 10, 2007 Jkt 059006 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 7633 Sfmt 7633 E:\HR\OC\HR741.XXX HR741 rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with HEARING VerDate Aug 31 2005 22:19 Jan 10, 2007 Jkt 059006 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 7633 Sfmt 7633 E:\HR\OC\HR741.XXX HR741 rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with HEARING Union Calendar No.
    [Show full text]