Get documents about "Us Illegal Immigrant
W
Shared by: beautifulone
Categories
Tags
how many illegal immigrants are in the us today, how are illegal mexican immigrant getting into the us, illegal immigrant in us, illegal immigrant problems in the us economy, 15, 000 illegal immigrants us borders, how are illegal immigrant getting into the us, exploited illegal immigrants in us, illegal immigrants and low skills employment in the us, benefits of illegal immigrants in the us, how many illegal immigrant are in us
-
Stats
- views:
- 40
- posted:
- 7/24/2009
- language:
- English
- pages:
- 6
Document Sample
F Wisconsin Briefs
from the Legislative Reference Bureau
Brief 07−6 April 2007
ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION
INTRODUCTION criminal enforcement that supports illegal
immigration control. While state police may
In April 2006, the Pew Hispanic Center investigate criminal activities such as a false
in Washington, D.C. estimated that of the 11 identification or alien smuggling rings, fed
million foreignborn individuals thought to eral immigration officials will handle civil
be living illegally in the United States today, issues involving citizenship and deporta
between 75,000 and 115,000 live in Wiscon tion, and do so without any input or assis
sin. The federal government is concerned tance from the state. However, this tradi
with illegal immigration because it presents tional separation of sovereign powers is
potential threats to the country’s domestic slowly eroding as states are granted, and in
and economic security. But illegal immigra some cases are taking, more of a role in deal
tion also has an immense impact on state and ing with illegal immigration.
local governments, involving education,
law enforcement, health, and public assis The Illegal Immigration Reform and
tance. For the most part, immigration has Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996
been under the jurisdiction and control of The Illegal Immigration Reform and
the federal government, which has priori Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996
tized eliminating unlawful entry at the bor amended the INA to allow the U.S. Attorney
ders, especially in the American Southwest. General to enter into agreements with state
However, as illegal immigration grows more and local governments to use their own local
prevalent across the country, and its effects agents in immigration enforcement within
increasingly impact localities far from their local jurisdiction. At that time, there
national borders, states are beginning to take were over 500,000 state and local law
action. enforcement agents, a number which
dwarfed that of the available federal
FEDERAL LAW immigration agents. This was the motivat
ing factor in approving the act, despite its
Congress enacted the McCarranWalter effect of blurring the line between federal
Bill of 1952, which combined existing and state immigration enforcement powers.
immigration laws scattered throughout the Increases in illegal immigration in the
federal statutes and recodified them into the intervening years have made the agree
Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), ments that resulted from the act a vital part
located in Title 8 of the U.S. Code. The INA of immigration law enforcement efforts.
contains both civil and criminal laws that are Because of this, Congress continues to con
applied to immigration issues. Tradition sider bills such as the Homeland Security
ally, the federal government has reserved Enhancement Act of 2005 and the Clear Law
civil enforcement power, such as verifying Enforcement for Criminal Alien Removal
citizenship and deporting undocumented Act of 2005, which would increase the role of
aliens, for itself, while allowing state and state and local governments in immigration
local governments some power over the law enforcement. The federal government
Prepared by Jason Anderson, Legislative Analyst Reference Desk: (608) 2660341
Web Site: www.legis.state.wi.us/lrb
−2 − LRB−07−WB−6
has also sought to involve the states in ment or interior enforcement. Although
immigration through administrative means Wisconsin is a border state, its northern bor
not related to law enforcement. der with Canada is not seen as a major entry
point for illegal immigrants, so enforcement
The Real ID Act of 2005 in the state has largely been focused on inte
In some cases, the federal government rior issues. Traditionally, the federal govern
involves states in less direct immigration ment has focused funding on border
enforcement, as with the Real ID Act of 2005. enforcement in the American Southwest,
The Real ID Act requires, in part, that a per giving less attention to other issues and
son present a federally accepted identifica areas. This has led states with interior
tion card in order to do such things as open enforcement problems, like Wisconsin, to
a bank account, travel on a plane, or take explore more creative ways to enforce
advantage of a variety of government ser immigration law. In addition to Act 126, the
vices. The act further requires that the states legislature considered various other mea
issue driver’s licenses that comply with Real sures intended to address illegal immigra
ID standards, which require more indepth tion during the 2005 legislative session.
identification and a citizenship inquiry. None, however, were enacted.
Critics have accused the federal govern 2005 Assembly Bill 227 – Legal Services
ment of essentially coercing the states into
fighting illegal immigration, but not com 2005 Assembly Bill 227 would have
pensating them for the expense. States will created new legal requirements and limits
have to make changes to their state identifi for notaries public who are not licensed
cation, and changes to the application pro attorneys. Specifically, the bill would have
cess itself, because state identification will be prohibited a notary from taking actions or
less useful if it does not comply with federal making statements that could mislead oth
requirements. The claim that the federal ers into thinking he or she is an attorney.
government is coercing states into immigra This bill involved immigration issues
tion enforcement has been somewhat dimin because of its prohibition on nonEnglish
ished, however, as many states have volun advertising, unless the advertisement
tarily taken on citizenship issues, includes, in both English and in the language
independent of any direction from the fed of the advertisement, that the notary is not
eral government. an attorney. The concern is that recent immi
In March 2006, the Wisconsin Legisla grants from Spanishspeaking countries
ture passed 2005 Assembly Bill 69, which may confuse a notary public for a notario
added a proof of permanent legal status publico. A notorio publico is a profession in
requirement to the criteria for acquiring a some Spanishspeaking countries, which is
Wisconsin driver’s license or identification similar to our notary public, but carries more
card. Governor Doyle signed the bill and it legal authority and responsibility, making
became 2005 Wisconsin Act 126. When it them more like attorneys than notaries in the
became effective on April 1, 2007, Act 126 United States.
brought Wisconsin into compliance with the In some southern border states, there
requirements of the Real ID Act and offi have been reports of notaries public misrep
cially made Wisconsin identification feder resenting their role in the immigration pro
ally accepted. cess, providing dubious, unsanctioned legal
advice and accepting payment for simple
WISCONSIN LEGISLATION tasks from immigrants who assume they
have such authority based on their title. In
Immigration enforcement typically falls response to such situations, several similar
into one of two categories: border enforce bills have been introduced in other states.
LRB−07−WB−6 − 3 −
The bills are an attempt to protect legal 20072008 biennial budget bill, 2007 Senate
immigrants and nonEnglishspeaking citi Bill 40.
zens from being victimized, and to discour
2005 Assembly Bill 703 − Employment
age relationships between notaries public
and immigrants seeking illegal entry into the 2005 Assembly Bill 703 would have
United States. created certain penalties against forprofit
The bill was introduced in March 2005 enterprises hiring an undocumented alien.
but was not reported out of committee. Again, this designation includes both for
eign citizens who overstay a visa, and those
who immigrate to the United States illegally.
2005 Assembly Bill 576 − Education The penalty for hiring an undocu
mented alien would essentially preclude
2005 Assembly Bill 576 would have guilty companies from receiving certain
allowed aliens who are not permanent legal government benefits. Specifically, a com
residents of the United States to pay resi pany would be denied any income or fran
dent, as opposed to higher nonresident, chise tax credits and any property tax
tuition or fees at a University of Wisconsin exemptions from the state, would be unable
System or Wisconsin Technical College Sys to enter into the most common kinds of pub
tem school if they meet certain require lic contracts with state or local governments,
ments. Additionally, the Wisconsin Techni and would be ineligible to receive any grants
cal College System normally only admits or loans from any local government unit.
Wisconsin residents, but the bill would This bill is an example of the kind of interior
allow admission of a nonresident if these immigration enforcement that is increas
same requirements are met. The bill would ingly found in many states that do not have
essentially allow a citizen of any other coun a hightraffic border, but still face problems
try to become a Wisconsin resident for the as a result of the immigration that happens
purposes of the UW and Wisconsin Techni elsewhere.
cal College Systems if they meet the neces
The bill was introduced in September
sary requirements.
2005 and referred to the Assembly Commit
Undocumented aliens who wished to be tee on Labor, where it died. The proposal has
treated as Wisconsin residents by the UW or been reintroduced in this session as 2007 As
Wisconsin Technical College Systems would sembly Bill 101.
have to meet three requirements: 1) be a
graduate of a Wisconsin high school or have 2005 Senate Bill 43 – Housing Assistance
acquired a general equivalency diploma 2005 Senate Bill 43 would have required
(GED) in Wisconsin, 2) have been continu a social security number from an applicant
ously present in the state for at least three for any housing or economic development
years following his or her first day of attend loan from the Wisconsin Housing and Eco
ing a Wisconsin high school, and 3) enroll in nomic Development Authority (WHEDA).
a UW or Wisconsin Technical College Sys Requiring a social security number from
tem school and provide the school with an those applying for a loan essentially makes
affidavit stating that he or she has filed an those without a social security number ineli
application for permanent legal residency in gible for assistance from WHEDA. The bill
the United States, or will file such an applica would therefore deny WHEDA assistance to
tion as soon as he or she is eligible to do so. any undocumented alien, though it would
The bill was introduced in July 2005 and do so based on the absence of a social secu
referred to the Committee on Colleges and rity number rather than on any inquiry into
Universities, where it ultimately died. This an applicant’s citizenship, which is a power
proposal has returned as part of the normally reserved for the federal govern
−4 − LRB−07−WB−6
ment. Many states have attempted to put able committee recommendation but
pressure on undocumented aliens by requir received no further action.
ing a social security number as a condition to
utilizing popular programs and services. 2005 Senate Bill 567 – Public Assistance
These laws also generally deal with matters 2005 Senate Bill 567 would have
of state concern, thereby avoiding conflicts required documentary proof of citizenship
with the federal government on immigra from any person applying for public assis
tion jurisdiction and tradition. tance from the Wisconsin Department of
The bill was introduced in February Health and Family Services or the Wisconsin
2005 and referred to the Committee on Department of Workforce Development.
Housing and Financial Institutions. It was Public assistance includes lowincome ser
withdrawn from that committee two vices such as Wisconsin Works income assis
months later and referred to the Committee tance, medical assistance, and food stamps.
on Veterans, Homeland Security, Military The measure was introduced in February
Affairs, Small Business and Government 2006 and passed the legislature three months
Reform, where it was recommended for pas later, in May.
sage but died before a full senate vote was This bill was passed by the legislature,
taken. but was vetoed by Governor Doyle on May
26, 2006. According to the governor’s veto
message, he vetoed the bill because the fed
2005 Senate Bill 715 – Law Enforcement
eral Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 already
2005 Senate Bill 715 would have prohib created a similar requirement of documen
ited units of local government from passing tary proof of citizenship, which Wisconsin
a law or ordinance prohibiting immigration adheres to. This proposal has returned as
status inquiries by their own employees. part of the 20072008 biennial budget bill,
2007 Senate Bill 40.
Local government in Wisconsin derives
its powers from the state constitution and
STATE LAWS
the legislature; therefore, the legislature is
able to impose some limits on what kind of States have adopted various approaches
laws cities, villages, towns, and counties can to deal with immigration.
pass. As an example, barring any conflict
with other laws, a city could pass an ordi Employment − Colorado
nance prohibiting its employees from The governor of Colorado signed a
inquiring about the citizenship of residents number of immigrationrelated bills on July
who seek services, perhaps to avoid deter 31, 2006, including 2006 House Bill 1017,
ring immigrants from reporting crimes. Sen which requires that employers verify each
ate Bill 715 would have prohibited munici employee’s citizenship within 20 days of
palities from being able to pass or enforce an hire, and retain proof of each employee’s
ordinance that prohibits inquiring about legal status. Under the law, the state has the
immigration status. Although the bill would power to audit employers and assess a fine
not grant any civil immigration enforcement of $5,000 against those who show “reckless
powers to Wisconsin municipalities, it disregard” in their investigation of
would guarantee that no municipality could employees or submission of proof of citizen
prohibit the exercise of such a power if it ship. States such as Georgia and Idaho have
were ever realized. passed similar laws to give private firms
The bill was introduced in April 2006 more responsibility in the enforcement of
and referred to the Committee on Judiciary, immigration laws and to reiterate and rein
Corrections and Privacy. It received a favor force existing federal laws.
LRB−07−WB−6 − 5 −
Human Trafficking − Iowa either of those designations, such as undocu
mented aliens, can receive only emergency
2006 Iowa Senate Bill 2219 was signed medical services under the law. Other states
into law by the governor on April 21, 2006. have proposed such laws, and some have
It was comprehensive human trafficking even proposed providing absolutely no
legislation that makes human trafficking a health care assistance for undocumented
felony under Iowa state law. The State aliens, including emergency care.
Department estimates that 18,000 to 20,000
individuals are trafficked into the United Study − North Carolina
States each year, in violation of existing fed
eral law. The Iowa law defines the different The governor of North Carolina signed
acts that constitute human trafficking, 2006 House Bill 1723 on August 16, 2006.
makes trafficking a crime under state law, The bill became The Studies Act of 2006, and
sets a penalty for violating that state law, and it contains instructions and funding for the
creates a Victim’s Compensation Fund. The Legislative Research Commission to begin a
law also calls for a study to examine the variety of state sponsored studies. Section
effects of human trafficking on its victims in 2.1(e) directs the Commission to study the
an effort to combat the circumstances that impact of undocumented aliens on the state
make people vulnerable to traffickers. of North Carolina. Under the law, the Com
mission may consider illegal immigration’s
Voting − Virginia impact on social services, the criminal justice
system, and the state’s economy, among
Many states are dealing with concerns other topics. This study marks one of the
that undocumented aliens are voting in elec first times a state has looked at the wide
tions in the United States. The governor of reaching repercussions of illegal immigra
Virginia signed 2006 House Bill 170, which tion and how it impacts one state, rather than
addresses noncitizens voting in Virginia the country as a whole.
elections, on May 18, 2006. The law requires
the Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles Omnibus − Georgia
to provide the State Elections Board each
month with a list of driver’s license appli In a somewhat novel approach, Georgia
cants who are not documented citizens. The chose to deal with illegal immigration
State Elections Board is able to cancel the through one wideranging bill. The Georgia
voter registration of anyone who appears on Legislature passed 2006 Senate Bill 529 and
the Department of Motor Vehicles list as it was signed on April 17, 2006, by the gover
undocumented. The State Elections Board nor. The bill addressed a number of illegal
must then keep those with undocumented immigrationrelated issues, from human
individuals in a separate database for four trafficking to state enforcement of federal
years to prevent reregistration as a legal immigration law to state tax and benefit
voter. treatment for aliens. The law is known as
The Georgia Security and Immigration
Health Care − Arizona Compliance Act, and it is an example of how
states can address many immigration con
The Arizona Legislature passed a bill, cerns with one unified legislative response.
signed by the governor on April 24, 2006, Other states are considering using the inter
which requires an individual to be a United est in immigration reform to fasttrack their
States citizen or a permanent legal resident own omnibus immigration bills to cut down
in order to receive any state health care bene on the obstacles and distractions of multiple
fits or assistance. Individuals who do not fit bills.
−6 − LRB−07−WB−6
Estimated Illegal Immigrant Population, by State, 2005
WA
ME
MT ND VT
OR NH MA
MN
ID NY
SD WI RI
MI
WY PA CT
IA NJ
NE OH DE
NV IL IN
UT WV MD
VA
CA CO
KS MO KY
NC
TN
OK SC
AZ AR
NM
MS AL GA
LA
TX
FL
AK
HI 300,000-400,000 to 2,500,000-2,750,000
75,000-100,000 to 250,000-300,000
10,000-30,000 to 55,000-85,000
less than 10,000
High Illegal Immigrant Population States Low Illegal Immigrant Population States
California – 2,500,0002,750,000 Indiana – 55,00085,000
Texas – 1,400,0001,600,000 Iowa – 55,00085,000
Florida – 800,000950,000 Oklahoma – 50,00075,000
New York – 550,000650,000 New Mexico – 50,00075,000
Arizona – 400,000450,000 Kansas – 40,00070,000
Illinois – 375,000425,000 South Carolina – 35,00075,000
Georgia – 350,000450,000 Missouri – 35,00065,000
New Jersey – 350,000425,000 Nebraska – 35,00055,000
North Carolina – 300,000400,000 Kentucky – 30,00060,000
Medium Illegal Immigrant Population States Alabama – 30,00050,000
Virginia – 250,000300,000 Mississippi – 30,00050,000
Maryland – 225,000275,000 Arkansas – 30,00050,000
Colorado – 225,000275,000 Louisiana – 25,00040,000
Washington – 200,000250,000 Idaho 25,00045,000
Massachusetts – 150,000250,000 Rhode Island – 20,00040,000
Nevada – 150,000200,000 Hawaii – 20,00035,000
Pennsylvania – 125,000175,000 Delaware – 15,00035,000
Oregon – 125,000175,000 New Hampshire – 10,00030,000
Tennessee – 100,000150,000 Very Low Illegal Immigrant Population States
Michigan – 100,000150,000 Alaska – Less than 10,000
Ohio – 75,000150,000 Wyoming – Less than 10,000
Wisconsin – 75,000115,000 South Dakota – Less than 10,000
Minnesota – 75,000100,000 Maine – Less than 10,000
Utah – 75,000100,000 Vermont – Less than 10,000
Connecticut – 75,000100,000 North Dakota – Less than 10,000
Montana – Less than 10,000
West Virginia – Less than 10,000
U.S. Total Illegal Immigration Population – 10,700,00011,500,000. Estimates calculated by the Pew Hispanic Center and based on March 2005
Current Population Survey.
Related docs
