Copycat of Arizona's Immigration Status Bill

January 20, 2011 10:24 AM

Copycat of Arizona's immigration status bill has passed the Mississippi Senate by a vote of 34-15. The difference here is that there is a precondition with the immigration status check. Though selection cannot be based on race, color, or country of origin but ability to English can cast enough suspicion to warrant a check on immigration status.
posted by azileretsis (73 comments total)

I see what you did there.
posted by rtha at 10:28 AM on January 20, 2011 [43 favorites]

Bring me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free. I shine my flashlight in their faces at night and demand their papers, funny accents being reasonable grounds, and deport them for not looking like they're from here and stealin ur jerbs, USA USA USA.
posted by mhoye at 10:30 AM on January 20, 2011 [13 favorites]

English (v): the ability to speak America's God-given language without some weird foreign-sounding accent
posted by gottabefunky at 10:30 AM on January 20, 2011

but ability to [speak] English can cast enough suspicion to warrant a check on immigration status.

I'm guessing a lot of good ol' boys are gonna end up in detention centers...
posted by atrazine at 10:30 AM on January 20, 2011 [5 favorites]

Fillingane said it's unclear how many illegal immigrants live in Mississippi but estimates are around 100,000.

"Somewhere in the neighborhood of $50 million in Mississippi taxpayers' dollars is being spent on services to illegals," he said.

Those stats still smell kinda funny, from when you pulled them out of your ass.
posted by gottabefunky at 10:32 AM on January 20, 2011 [5 favorites]

but ability to [speak] English can cast enough suspicion to warrant a check on immigration status.

And so deaf mutes get fucked once again.
posted by Astro Zombie at 10:34 AM on January 20, 2011 [9 favorites]

"Somewhere in the neighborhood of $50 million in Mississippi taxpayers' dollars is being spent on services to illegals,"

Odd. No mention of the millions put into the pockets of businesses thanks to the illegals' labor.
posted by Thorzdad at 10:35 AM on January 20, 2011 [19 favorites]

Well, then, that makes two states I'm boycotting.
posted by bearwife at 10:35 AM on January 20, 2011 [3 favorites]

The article's first sentence is misleading, and it doesn't get its facts straight until the eighth paragraph. Law enforcement agents aren't being tasked with this. They're not being forced to do it. They're being authorized to verify a person's immigration status if they suspect they might be illegal and indemnified from legal prosecution for doing so, as long as they follow can justify their suspicions.

Put another way, no one is fining or punishing police officers if they don't do this.
posted by zarq at 10:36 AM on January 20, 2011 [1 favorite]

errr... that should say, "as long as they follow the rules and can justify their suspicions. "
posted by zarq at 10:37 AM on January 20, 2011

So, they can't discriminate on race or color, but they can pull over anyone who looks like they don't speak good English?
posted by ceribus peribus at 10:38 AM on January 20, 2011

Oh man, this kind of stuff scares the crap out of me. My grandmother is a US citizen now, but developed some cognitive issues (not permanent, thank goodness) after a blood clot ended up in her lungs a year ago. She stopped being able to speak and understand English for a little while and moved in with my parents. I can just imagine her going to the store with my mom, wandering off and next thing we know there is a very delicate 84 year old that we have to spring out of INS custody.
posted by Alison at 10:39 AM on January 20, 2011

It's not the job of police to evaluate immigration status.
posted by ged at 10:39 AM on January 20, 2011 [7 favorites]

Fuck.
posted by dunkadunc at 10:40 AM on January 20, 2011

That the most racist, backward, poverty-stricken, least educated state is implementing your ideology should not exactly be the most encouraging sign for its adherents.
posted by goethean at 10:41 AM on January 20, 2011 [8 favorites]

Since immigration is a federal issue, how can states even get into its enforcement? I know the FAA is quick to stomp on any state that's thinking of regulating aviation or airspace.
posted by phliar at 10:43 AM on January 20, 2011

Since the AZ bill was written by the private prison lobby so they could house more inmates, is anyone looking into the influence of the privatized prison lobby in Mississippi especially in relation to this bill?

Mississippi "may be spending $50Million on services for illegals", but how much does the private prisons stand to make from the government every year after this is in full effect? I'd bet its more than $50Million.
posted by brando_calrissian at 10:45 AM on January 20, 2011 [11 favorites]

I can English let me show you.
posted by Mister_A at 10:46 AM on January 20, 2011 [3 favorites]

ged: "It's not the job of police to evaluate immigration status."

Except... it sort of is, and has been for two years now.

The Department of Homeland Security announced an initiative back in 2009 which has been proceeding apace: people who are arrested get their fingerprint taken, and they are cross-checked with not only the FBI's database, but also with the DHS Ident database, which:

The program checks a detainee’s biometrics against a watch list of nearly five million known or suspected terrorists, criminals and immigration violators that have been identified by U.S. government agencies and Interpol....

The difference here is that the people being checked in Mississippi don't have to be under arrest -- the check can be run if they are being lawfully detained or stopped.
posted by zarq at 10:47 AM on January 20, 2011 [1 favorite]

i would be glad to be the first Spanish-speaking US citizen and Puerto Rican to go to Mississippi and get ICEd so i can sue these fuckers up to the Wise Latina's Supreme Court :P
posted by liza at 10:48 AM on January 20, 2011 [15 favorites]

And in a few years Haley Barbour will tell us how it really wasn't all that bad.
posted by BitterOldPunk at 10:50 AM on January 20, 2011

urgh. can i edit the post? i am forgetting verbs all over the place these days. my mind is faster than my fingers, even in proofreading.

"but ability to SPEAK English can cast enough suspicion to warrant a check on immigration status"
posted by azileretsis at 10:50 AM on January 20, 2011

Except... it sort of is, and has been for two years now.

Under the program you mention the police may provide the fingerprint data, but they don't evaluate immigration status. It's also a simple, mechanical process: you get arrested, your fingerprints get run. There's no judgment call on the part of the police.
posted by jedicus at 10:52 AM on January 20, 2011 [1 favorite]

Intentional or not, that "ability to English" bit is some of the subtlest trolling I've seen on the blue in some time.
posted by mhoye at 10:58 AM on January 20, 2011 [4 favorites]

Can we give the police the power to check for corporate fraud while we are at it? I'd love to see some cops kicking in the door of Bank of America and grabbing all of their data...

Cop: Ah ha! These expense reports have been doctored!
BOA CEO: No, no...those mink pants are written into my benefits package...really!
Cop: Tell it to the tribunal at the corporate crime holding facility!
BOA CEO: This is profiling! Just because I am wearing mink pants!

Ha, ha, ha. Good times.
posted by zerobyproxy at 10:59 AM on January 20, 2011 [11 favorites]

Oh, what the hell..?
Since when has a there been a billiards test for immigration?
posted by Enigmark at 11:04 AM on January 20, 2011 [3 favorites]

and next thing we know there is a very delicate 84 year old that we have to spring out of INS custody.

If you can find her. ICE is not so good at keeping track of people sometimes.
posted by rtha at 11:07 AM on January 20, 2011

jedicus: " Under the program you mention the police may provide the fingerprint data, but they don't evaluate immigration status. It's also a simple, mechanical process: you get arrested, your fingerprints get run. There's no judgment call on the part of the police."

True.
posted by zarq at 11:08 AM on January 20, 2011

but ability to English can cast enough suspicion to warrant a check on immigration status.

I'm down with this. Lets make every yahoo in these backwards states take the verbal section of the SAT and deport every last one of them scoring below a 600.
posted by sourwookie at 11:09 AM on January 20, 2011 [6 favorites]

Wow, I thought this was some weird typo, after hearing about Colorado's effort to mimic the Arizona anti-immigration laws. One difference: police would be allowed (but not required!) to arrest anyone if they had probable cause to believe they were an illegal immigrant (who is facing deportation or against whom federal immigration authorities have issued a detainer order, or who has been indicted or convicted of aggravated felonies). As Colorado is currently controlled by Democrats, such attempts are unlikely to get anywhere.

But Colorado and Mississippi aren't alone - The Washington Independent lists 25 states where state legislators are looking to mimic Arizona SB 1070, even though a federal injunction blocked key portions of the bill in July.
posted by filthy light thief at 11:14 AM on January 20, 2011

ability to English can cast enough suspicion to warrant a check on immigration status

on the other hand, ability to french will make you very popular in high school
posted by pyramid termite at 11:16 AM on January 20, 2011 [8 favorites]

Seems like we talk and talk and talk about this but we never discuss policing the people who are employing the illegals. I don't get it. Where is there a more practical place to check credentials than at the place of employment? You've got to do it all anyway for the tax people.

Yet more stupid to go with all the other stupid.
posted by Trochanter at 11:21 AM on January 20, 2011 [3 favorites]

Wake me when they require the ability to massé.
posted by Eideteker at 11:26 AM on January 20, 2011 [1 favorite]

English, motherfucker! Can you it!?
posted by gilrain at 11:29 AM on January 20, 2011 [43 favorites]

can i edit the post?

Why would you want to make yourself look less smart? Are you from Mississippi or something?
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 11:30 AM on January 20, 2011

They WANT the labor of illegal immigrants. They just want to keep them as marginalized as possible, so they won't stand up for themselves when they're put in inhumane work conditions or paid like shit, for fear of being arrested.
posted by dunkadunc at 11:31 AM on January 20, 2011 [24 favorites]

Exactly, dunkadunc, and just like with slavery, they also want a group of people to be the target of the lower class's anger and hatred, thereby directing it away from the people who truly deserve to be targets of that anger.
posted by lord_wolf at 11:46 AM on January 20, 2011 [6 favorites]

I wonder how long it'll be before some power-tripping cop uses this to detain a black guy under the excuse that AAVE doesn't sound English enough.

Because, if you have a racist tool in your kit, there isn't any reason not to use it against every minority you want to keep down.
posted by quin at 11:48 AM on January 20, 2011

I count Nebraska, Oklahoma, Missouri, and Colorado as racing to join the party, and that's just states in my area where this kind of thing ends up in the local news. I've heard the same thing is going on in Utah and South Carolina but am not sure where those efforts stand. I know there is tremendous noise coming from the peanut gallery here in Iowa to go this direction.

I'd be surprised if similar legislation doesn't get introduced in every state's legislative agenda this year. While there are various degrees of openness to the idea, I imagine most of these bills will be seriously discussed with a majority of states passing something similar.

(or kind of what filthy light theif says above, with a link even)

While I personally feel sick about this trend, I can't help but hope this foreboding is an artifact of my own cynicism and low expectations for the majority of my fellow citizens. But that hope feels awful hollow right about now.
posted by Fezboy! at 11:51 AM on January 20, 2011

Zarq, the secure communities initiative that you mention above is sponsored by the DHS but remains a voluntary program. It has had a mixed reception from local law enforcement; enthusiastically embraced in some places (perhaps because ICE 'holds' on an arrestee can bring some federal payments for the time they spend in the local jail), but rejected by law enforcement in other places with large Latino populations, particularly California and Texas.

I don't see this Mississippi law getting very far before falling to a court challenge; it's not hard to find US citizens unable to speak English.
posted by anigbrowl at 11:53 AM on January 20, 2011 [1 favorite]

we never discuss policing the people who are employing the illegals

I suspect it's because the politicians in situations like this are trying to please two masters.

On one side, the politicians have businesses who profit from the pool of cheap, disposable laborers that illegal workers represent. Without illegal workers, they'd be forced to increase salaries until they filled some of the really awful jobs with legal workers (e.g. slaughterhouse / meat-packing operations), and generally deal with a tighter labor market that you can't abuse as readily. These businesses provide the politicians cash in return for not cracking down too hard and cutting into their profitability.

On the other side, there is the restive, angry populist mob, who see illegal workers as a cause of wage depression and a slack labor market (when they don't just dislike them for being swarthy and talking funny), and want them all deported. The mob doesn't have money, but the mob does have votes. And as uncouth as it may be, politicians still occasionally need votes to stay in office.

So the politicians have responded by coming up with initiatives that look tough, in order to please the mob, but don't really do anything, in order to please their financiers.

It would be relatively trivial to end (or at least severely, dramatically curtail) the employment of illegal immigrants, by mandating that all employers use something like USCIS' e-Verify system, for all new or new-and-existing hires, as of a specific date, and imposing some sort of "corporate death penalty" for willful noncompliance. The key is to make it apply to everyone, without loopholes, and to make the penalties for noncompliance spectacularly higher than the benefits to a company for using illegal workers. Done and done.

While that would solve the problem, it wouldn't please the business owners who profit from the status quo, so my bet is that you'll never see it. Not as long as money remains a factor as important to votes in US politics.
posted by Kadin2048 at 12:00 PM on January 20, 2011 [2 favorites]

What I don't get is, why not just say "we wanna profile brown people?" It's no more or less illegal that all these carefully-worded pieces of bullshit.

I swear, every anti-immigration bill is like the legislative equivalent of "I have the right to test software before I actually decide if I want to buy it or not." Shut the fuck up and just admit you want to break the law.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 12:00 PM on January 20, 2011

Seems like we talk and talk and talk about this but we never discuss policing the people who are employing the illegals. I don't get it.

What's not to get? If you punish companies who hire illegals, then American companies that pay American taxes and hire American lobbyists are hindered. If you punish illegals for having the audacity to accept money when offered it for work, then you can kick them out of the country and get new ones.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 12:09 PM on January 20, 2011

"Not as long as money remains a factor as important to votes in US politics."

Money is a much more important factor than votes. Money is the goal, votes are the vehicle to get the money.
posted by brando_calrissian at 12:11 PM on January 20, 2011

The United State Government(s): Punishing the victims since 1776
posted by blue_beetle at 12:23 PM on January 20, 2011 [1 favorite]

There is an enormous income disparity in the rural South, where a few wealthy individuals and families control nearly all of the wealth.

This is true in a lot of places, but one big difference in the South is that these rich people mingle with the poor and are accepted because they very commonly shop in the local grocery, buy personally from the local car dealer, and in some cases even wear blue jeans and drive pickup trucks; it's not unusual to find the guy who owns several processing plants out on the production floor, watching maintenance guys as they work on some especially important job. As a result the typical rural poor person doesn't realize just how much richer these guys are than they are. They actually think that with pluck and hard work, they have a chance to Horatio Alger themselves into such a position one day.

And a big difference between Mississippi and states like Louisiana or Alabama is that Mississippi has no large cities; Jackson is the only proper large metro area and at at half a million or so only represents 1/6 of the state's population. So state politics are controlled top to bottom by these wealthy rural regional barons.

And as their politics go, it's all about money. If one of these guys decides to build a plant near some town, they will be welcomed with palm leaves and incense, even as the owner sends agents to the Solomon Islands to troll for cheap labor. The natives know better than to complain because the mechanics, shopkeepers, real estate agents, and so on are all making money off the immigrant workers even if lots of the poor would also like to have the actual plant jobs for a living wage. The natives know what will happen if they complain too loudly; the plant closes, and everything goes away to the next more cooperative town.

In this situation something like this bill was absolutely inevitable. At least they realized it would probably get knocked down embarrassingly by the Supreme Court (really the only down side of this for the people pushing it) if they left the *requirement* in place, so they toned it down to "authorization."

This will be popular with the rural natives because it looks like something is being done about these weird newcomers, and nobody will connect the dot that Earl the friendly guy who owns the local plant (and six more in other towns) and his other rich buddies are never going to torpedo their own businesses by letting it get really effective. In fact, Earl and buds like the law because it not only keeps the Tea Party base happy, it keeps the foreign workers in line so they don't do uppity things like getting involved in local politics. Win win win. And there's nothing to stop it because there are no urban areas where the dynamic might be different large enough to offset those votes.
posted by localroger at 12:29 PM on January 20, 2011 [21 favorites]

> On one side, the politicians have businesses who profit from the pool of cheap, disposable laborers that illegal workers
> represent. Without illegal workers, they'd be forced to increase salaries until they filled some of the really awful jobs
> with legal workers (e.g. slaughterhouse / meat-packing operations), and generally deal with a tighter labor market
> that you can't abuse as readily.
>
> On the other side, there is the restive, angry populist mob, who see illegal workers as a cause of wage depression and a
> slack labor market

And who would be right about that, per your previous paragraph.
posted by jfuller at 12:39 PM on January 20, 2011

anigbrowl: "Zarq, the secure communities initiative that you mention above is sponsored by the DHS but remains a voluntary program. It has had a mixed reception from local law enforcement; enthusiastically embraced in some places (perhaps because ICE 'holds' on an arrestee can bring some federal payments for the time they spend in the local jail), but rejected by law enforcement in other places with large Latino populations, particularly California and Texas."

Excellent. (That it's voluntary and some places are refusing it.) I wasn't aware. Thanks for pointing that out.
posted by zarq at 12:44 PM on January 20, 2011

Ugh. I wanted to go visit New Orleans before I leave Alabama but now? As a legal "non-resident alien", it makes me really uncomfortable to think about going through Mississippi. I mean, sure, I speak English with only a vague Canadian accent but sometimes (seriously) Southerners don't understand me (and vice versa). I can bring my papers along and know that I'm not 'the people' they're after. But.

I just hate that I know, and have been told, I'm not 'the people' they're looking for. Even if I didn't have my papers, I could probably get away with not being taken into custody or deported. But it seems so, I don't know, completely wrong somehow.

Like when I saw a bar in San Diego that wouldn't let you in with a out-of-country passport. Again it wasn't directed at me (probably) but I don't automatically side with people from the US.

So, driving to New Orleans will take about twice as long as it should.
posted by hydrobatidae at 1:18 PM on January 20, 2011

The difference here is that there is a precondition with the immigration status check. Though selection cannot be based on race, color, or country of origin but ability to English can cast enough suspicion to warrant a check on immigration status.

As far as I can tell from a reading of the statutes and the article, this statement is not warranted. There is no mention of ability to speak English in either the Arizona or Mississippi statutes that I see. The article quotes one of the Mississippi lawmakers as saying that a lack of English-speaking ability could be grounds for reasonable suspicion for checking someone's immigration status. According to the article, the chief difference between the statutes is that in the Mississippi bill, the background check would be pushed back to secondary status -- presumably only allowable after someone is stopped for something else -- rather than primary status, as in the Arizona law.
posted by ekroh at 1:19 PM on January 20, 2011

Like when I saw a bar in San Diego that wouldn't let you in with a out-of-country passport. Again it wasn't directed at me (probably) but I don't automatically side with people from the US.

To be fair, I lived in San Diego 10 years ago and had trouble buying beer (in both bars and convenience stores) with a passport, and once even had my Nevada drivers license refused. It was generally only a problem near UCSD.

Zero tolerance laws make people paranoid.
posted by coolguymichael at 1:34 PM on January 20, 2011

25 states where state legislators are looking to mimic Arizona SB 1070

Goddammit Minnesota what the fuck are you doing on that list. And where's South Dakota? They love idiotic legislation over there.

Actually, I'd wager half of the states listed went Democrat last election. *checks* ... Thirteen of those states went Obama in 2008.
posted by graventy at 1:54 PM on January 20, 2011

Any ideas on how this will play out with foreign tourists?

"I don't know what this little book doc-U-mint is son but it ain't from the US of A. I'm going to have to handcuff you and take you to jail now."
posted by JJ86 at 2:17 PM on January 20, 2011

#1 in obesity, check.
#1 in poverty, check.
#1 in un-educatedness, check.

Look out Arizona, when we grab the #1 spot for ignorant-assed racism (or reclaim it as it were) we are so gonna rule!
posted by anansi at 3:00 PM on January 20, 2011

English, motherfucker! Can you it!?

Yeah, there'll be bunch of these falling off a truck somewhere in MS.
posted by fuse theorem at 3:25 PM on January 20, 2011

JJ86: Any ideas on how this will play out with foreign tourists?

What foreign tourist would ever want to go to Mississippi?
posted by moonbiter at 3:28 PM on January 20, 2011

Mississippi State Police Officer: Sir, your failure to speak proper American English gives me the authority to assess your immigration status.

Ralph Wiggum: Me fail English? That's unpossible!

yeah, your honor, it was totally his english skills and not his yellow skin that compelled me to investigate...
posted by palindromic at 4:01 PM on January 20, 2011

This is like searching New Yorkers who appear rushed and impolite.
posted by swift at 5:00 PM on January 20, 2011

zarq writes "Put another way, no one is fining or punishing police officers if they don't do this."

And traffic enforcement cops don't have quotas.

pyramid termite writes "on the other hand, ability to french will make you very popular in high school"

What does the ability to Canadian get one?

Fezboy! writes "I'd be surprised if similar legislation doesn't get introduced in every state's legislative agenda this year. "

Sad if it happens; I would have thought that some states couldn't be bothered. Maybe Alaska.
posted by Mitheral at 7:45 PM on January 20, 2011

the most racist...state

How do you measure this? Is the SI unit for racism the wallace?
posted by one more dead town's last parade at 7:53 PM on January 20, 2011

> It would be relatively trivial to end (or at least severely, dramatically curtail) the employment of illegal immigrants, by mandating that all employers use something like USCIS' e-Verify system,

NO, we don't need more damned Universal ID cards.

If they simply jailed employers for hiring illegal immigrants, the problem would go away overnight.
posted by lupus_yonderboy at 8:10 PM on January 20, 2011

I was refused a passport as ID in Wisconsin when I was in my 30s. I did however manage to humiliate the manager and cause our table of a dozen to leave.

He admitted that there was no way I was under 21, but he "had to be careful", so I told him, "What you're saying is that you think this might be a fake passport. That's a felony, so what you're saying is that you think I might be a criminal. I find this personally insulting in exactly the same way that you would if I came up to you and accused you of picking my pocket." He hemmed and hawed and said, "Well, that's not exactly what I mean," but then he wouldn't deny either that he thought my passport might be fake, and people laughed at him, and we left.

I'm so sick of these losers.

Looks like we're not too far from a Republican takeover. If it weren't for the fact that the architects of the disaster will be the last ones to see the consequences, I'd be seriously looking forward to seeing these people humiliated, their country turned to shit and best of all, the dawning realization that they did it to themselves, that they don't have any liberals or illegal immigrants to blame any more.

But the awful things that are going to happen to kids, to women, to old people, to people of colour, to the poor. :-(
posted by lupus_yonderboy at 8:22 PM on January 20, 2011 [1 favorite]

What does the ability to Canadian get one?

a gig with guy lombardo
posted by pyramid termite at 8:29 PM on January 20, 2011 [2 favorites]

Every time this bullshit comes up, I remind people that Puerto Ricans are American citizens who don't speak English.

Thus, bad test.
posted by klangklangston at 8:48 PM on January 20, 2011

Two things I wanted to add to this thread:

1) English is not I repeat not the official language of the United States, so not only is bullshit racist law racist, but it's also of questionable constitutionality.

2) Before he was well-known for speaking out during the denouement of the recent Arizona shootings, Sheriff Clarence Dupnik spoke out on Larry King Live against the Arizona immigration law, pointing out that not only was it unnecessary (local police can already arrest people who are violating federal laws) but it places an undue burden on local resources.

Note: video is billed as "Sheriff Larry Dever" (who is an entertaining yahoo) but Sheriff Dupnik provides the counterpoint.
posted by tractorfeed at 1:56 AM on January 21, 2011

Just an FYI, there aren't very many cops in Mississippi. Geographically it's rather large, and they have a smaller state budget than the school district of Houston, TX. If you've got the right rental car, and are careful on I-55, no one's going to bother you. You can't have arrests without cops to do the arresting.

I drive the length of the state every month, and I probably see 1 pull-over per 100 miles.

LocalRoger has a bead on how the state works. It's unbelievably insular.
posted by Arquimedez Pozo at 6:42 AM on January 21, 2011

In the link, State Sen. Joey Fillingane, R-Sumrall, looks like he was just hauled out of the back end of a pickup while sleeping off a bender, had a suit slapped on him, and was asked to defend his numbnutz bill to an angry mob.
posted by Mental Wimp at 1:09 PM on January 21, 2011

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. - 14th Amendment
posted by azileretsis at 8:40 PM on January 21, 2011

If they simply jailed employers for hiring illegal immigrants, the problem would go away overnight.

How are the employers supposed to know whether an employee is legally eligible to work or not? It's difficult to start throwing employers in jail without providing them a means to comply with the law to begin with.

Some sort of online verification is about the least-creepy system that I can think of that isn't immediately racist (don't provide any verification system but hold employers responsible, thus encouraging them to simply refuse to employ anyone who looks foreign) or trivial to abuse (making everyone carry ID cards around that can be stolen or forged).
posted by Kadin2048 at 8:51 PM on January 21, 2011

If they simply jailed employers for hiring illegal immigrants, the problem would go away overnight.

I don't think hitting more people with bigger sticks would make the world a nicer place.
posted by dunkadunc at 8:56 PM on January 21, 2011

Related news: Judicial emergency declared in Arizona, allowing courts to delay criminal trials up to six months.

Arizona federal courts were already overwhelmed by a 65% increase in criminal cases in the last two years and two judicial vacancies when U.S. District Judge John M. Roll was killed in the Jan. 8 attack that also severely wounded Democratic Rep. Gabrielle Giffords.
...
Arizona's federal courts have been inundated with immigration and border security cases because of stepped-up enforcement along the U.S.-Mexico border. In announcing the emergency, judges said a Department of Homeland Security program that requires criminal prosecution and imprisonment of anyone unlawfully crossing the border has exacerbated their backlog. More federal prosecutors were brought in to the Tucson district, but no additional judges have been authorized, the judges said.

posted by filthy light thief at 2:45 PM on January 27, 2011

Oh, and Mississippi House and Senate OKs revised immigration bill (via).
posted by filthy light thief at 2:46 PM on January 27, 2011

Arizona's federal courts have been inundated with immigration and border security cases because of stepped-up enforcement along the U.S.-Mexico border.

So, "Aggressively enforce our immigration laws!" and "Cut our taxes!" are diametrically opposed platform planks? Imagine that.
posted by Mental Wimp at 10:49 AM on January 31, 2011