Skip to main content

If the Supreme Court upholds the constitutionality of Arizona's immigration enforcement law, Sen. Charles Schumer, chairman of the Senate Subcommittee on Immigration, says he will introduce legislation that bars all states from enforcing their own immigration laws. Republican members boycotted the subcommittee hearing where the Democratic senator from New York made the announcement Tuesday morning. Republican Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona called it "political theater." Schumer said it's not the first time Republicans have refused to sit down to discuss the issue.

The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments Wednesday on the Arizona law, SB 1070, which requires public officials to actively identify illegal immigrants and makes it a crime for them to look for work. The Obama administration seeks to have parts of the law set aside. Five other Republican-dominated states—Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, South Carolina and Utah—have used the Arizona model in passing their own laws. A Court ruling is expected in June.  

Pointing out that Congress has already made clear its opposition to state laws on immigration, Schumer said in a statement:

“It is simply too damaging to our economy and too dangerous to our democracy to have 50 different states be permitted to take their own direction when it comes to immigration policy. [...] The Supreme Court should find the Arizona law unconstitutional, but if it doesn’t, Congress will be ready. States should be barred from taking immigration enforcement matters into their own hands and imposing penalties as they see fit. This has always been a role of the federal government. It is impractical to have a patchwork of different immigration laws across the country.”

The senator's proposal would prohibit states from imposing their own civil or criminal penalties for immigration law violations and bar them "from detecting, apprehending or detaining violators of immigration law, unless they have been authorized and trained to do so as part of a federal enforcement effort." His bill would also seek to override the Supreme Court's decision in Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting. The ruling allows states to establish their own immigration employment verification requirements and penalties.

"Immigration has not and never has been an area where states are able to exercise independent authority," Schumer said at the hearing. "States like Arizona and Alabama will no longer be able to get away with saying they're simply helping the federal government ... to enforce the law when they are really writing their own laws and knowingly deploying untrained officers with the mission of arresting anyone and everyone who might fit the preconceived profile of an illegal immigrant."

Only Schumer and Democrat Richard Durbin of Illinois showed up for the hearing, in which testimony included that of the author of SB 1070, former Arizona state Sen. Russell Pearce.

Schumer's proposal has no chance of clearing the deadlocked Senate or the majority-Republican ruled House. But the move would reinforce the sharp difference between the immigration views of Republicans and those of most Democrats. Latinos are especially hostile to the state laws, not least because their enforcement adds another layer to racial profiling by law enforcement. And yet Republicans can't figure out why they have such a tough time attracting more Latino voters. Perhaps it would help if they would put away that sharpened stick with which they keep poking them in the eye.

Originally posted to Meteor Blades on Tue Apr 24, 2012 at 10:53 AM PDT.

Also republished by LatinoKos, Baja Arizona Kossacks, and Daily Kos.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site