As the much anticipated Congressional debate on Immigration Reform draws near, religious leaders are stepping up efforts to bring a more humane, thoughtful voice to the issue.
The Arizona Republic published an article on October 19 quoting Bishop Minerva Carcaño, Desert Southwest Annual Conference of the United Methodist Church, as follows: “We truly are with you…And we believe that God is on your side too.”
On October 8, testimony was given to the Senate Subcommittee on Immigration, Refugees, and Border Security by key religious leaders on Comprehensive Immigration Reform. Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, Archbishop Emeritus of Washington D.C. testified that “Our nation requires an immigration system that marries legal immigration with our long-term economic needs, the principle of family unity, and basic human rights. This will help restore the rule of law to our immigration system. Now, our immigration system accomplishes none of these goals…In truth, the church position in favor of reform seeks to restore the rule of law and provide order and legality to an otherwise chaotic system.”
Cardinal McCarrick outlined the key elements the U.S. Catholic Bishop’s Committee on Migration believes should be addressed in any immigration reform legislation:
1. Bring the undocumented population in this country out of the shadows and give them a chance, over time, to achieve permanent residency and citizenship.
2. Preserve family unity by strengthening family-based immigration.
3. Create legal avenues for migration, so that migrant workers, who labor in many important industries in our nation, are able to enter the country legally and in a sage and orderly fashion.
4. Give immigrants their day in court by restoring due process protections removed in 1996 legislation.
Reverend James A. Tolle, Senior Pastor of The Church on The Way in Los Angeles with over 20,000 members and more than 50,000 affiliated churches also testified before the Subcommittee. Reverend Tolle spoke to the Senate stating: “In Seeking Comprehensive Immigration Reform, I am motivated by the phrase in the Declaration of Independence which states that ‘all men are created equal…with certain unalienable rights.’ Unalienable rights are those human rights which transcend law and the preferences of other people….My pursuit of comprehensive immigration reform comes from Leviticus 19:34, which states, ‘ The stranger who dwells with you shall be unto you just as one born among you, and you shall love him as yourself.”
Values reflection, including exploration of the religious foundations of our commitment to Comprehensive Immigration Reform, will help our state and nation successfully grapple with a broken immigration system that must be fixed.
Monday, October 26, 2009
Monday, October 19, 2009
ARPAIO V. NAPOLITANO/HOLDER
It would be remiss of us not to comment on the recent media blitz Sheriff Joe Arpaio has stirred up over the last couple of weeks. It all began when the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), headed by former Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano, unveiled an attempt to repair the immigrant detention system rife with human rights abuses. It seems a letter written by Reps. Nydia Velazquez, D-NY and Luis Gutierrez, D-IL, along with concerns raised by organizations like ours, prompted the reconsideration and action.
The Gutierrez/Velazquez letter chided federal officials for their failed oversight of rogue law enforcement under existing law. “We do not believe that allowing state and local police to racially profile and target our immigrant communities inspires confidence in our ability to enact (comprehensive immigration reform),” the Gutierrez/Velazquez letter stated. “It is our experience that state and local law enforcement officials actually use their expanded and often unchecked powers under the program to target immigrants and persons of color. It is our opinion that no amount of reforms, no matter how well-intentioned, will change this disturbing reality.”
Maricopa County has emerged as the test case. In Maricopa County, the new agreement between DHS and Sheriff Joe Arpaio is intended to limit Arpaio and his deputies to checking only the immigration status of jail inmates.
But this assertion of federal authority has prompted Sheriff Arpaio to declare his open and aggressive defiance of federal oversight through word and deed. Congressmen Gutierrez and Velazquez raise the disturbing possibility that future defiance of federal authority may include outright refusal to follow federal statute should some version of comprehensive immigration become the law of the land this spring.
The Gutierrez/Velazquez letter chided federal officials for their failed oversight of rogue law enforcement under existing law. “We do not believe that allowing state and local police to racially profile and target our immigrant communities inspires confidence in our ability to enact (comprehensive immigration reform),” the Gutierrez/Velazquez letter stated. “It is our experience that state and local law enforcement officials actually use their expanded and often unchecked powers under the program to target immigrants and persons of color. It is our opinion that no amount of reforms, no matter how well-intentioned, will change this disturbing reality.”
Maricopa County has emerged as the test case. In Maricopa County, the new agreement between DHS and Sheriff Joe Arpaio is intended to limit Arpaio and his deputies to checking only the immigration status of jail inmates.
But this assertion of federal authority has prompted Sheriff Arpaio to declare his open and aggressive defiance of federal oversight through word and deed. Congressmen Gutierrez and Velazquez raise the disturbing possibility that future defiance of federal authority may include outright refusal to follow federal statute should some version of comprehensive immigration become the law of the land this spring.
Monday, October 12, 2009
RESPECT FOR HUMAN LIFE
Whatever a person's feelings about the immigration issue, we can all agree that human life is precious.
According to the Washington Post last week (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/29/AR2009092903212_pf.html) there are already more reported deaths this year due to border crossings than all of last year. Even though most border agencies are reporting less people attempting to come across the border, the death toll in the desert continues to rise.
In the last fifteen years, there has been a concerted, mostly successful effort to block men, women and children from entering into the U.S. through urban border towns such as El Paso and San Diego. As a result, increasing numbers of these families are choosing to cross through more dangerous, more remote desert areas, like along our Arizona border. Their decision to cross despite the warnings and very real dangers is a testimony to their determination.
Every 24 hours one of them dies - from thirst, starvation, extreme weather, fatigue or some combination.
Arizonans for Immigration Reform respects life, all human life. We know that the tragedy of desperation and death played out on Arizona's border will only end with the passage of comprehensive immigration reform. Respect for human life should be an important part of moral conversations about immigration reform now ongoing in congregations throughout our state.
According to the Washington Post last week (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/29/AR2009092903212_pf.html) there are already more reported deaths this year due to border crossings than all of last year. Even though most border agencies are reporting less people attempting to come across the border, the death toll in the desert continues to rise.
In the last fifteen years, there has been a concerted, mostly successful effort to block men, women and children from entering into the U.S. through urban border towns such as El Paso and San Diego. As a result, increasing numbers of these families are choosing to cross through more dangerous, more remote desert areas, like along our Arizona border. Their decision to cross despite the warnings and very real dangers is a testimony to their determination.
Every 24 hours one of them dies - from thirst, starvation, extreme weather, fatigue or some combination.
Arizonans for Immigration Reform respects life, all human life. We know that the tragedy of desperation and death played out on Arizona's border will only end with the passage of comprehensive immigration reform. Respect for human life should be an important part of moral conversations about immigration reform now ongoing in congregations throughout our state.
Friday, October 2, 2009
IMMIGRATION: A FEDERAL ISSUE?
“This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.” Article VI U.S. Constitution Sec 1, cl. 2
The above passage is commonly referred to as the Supremacy Clause. This section of the U.S. Constitution effectively prohibits States and local governments from making laws that are expressly or impliedly regulated by Congress. When dealing with immigration issues, however, the situation becomes muddled. Do the states have authority to make anti or pro-immigration laws?
In 1952, Congress passed the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). This solidified the federal government’s control over immigration. In 1986, Congress passed the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA), which defined the conditions of employment for immigrant and anti-discrimination provisions preventing employers from discriminating against immigrants while complying with the IRCA. So does this answer our question? Not really.
Although Federal laws preempt State and local authorities’ abilities to make laws on the same subject matter, issues become blurred when the Federal Law does not “expressly” regulate a certain issue. In other words, when the federal government leaves gaps, the states attempt to fill them. For example, Secretary of Homeland Security and former Governor Janet Napolitano indicated that “immigration is a federal responsibility, but signed House Bill 2779 [Legal Arizona Workers Act] because it is abundantly clear that Congress finds itself incapable of coping with the comprehensive immigration reform our country needs.” The question becomes even more convoluted when Congress passed the CLEAR (Clear Law Enforcement for Criminal Alien Removal) Act and Homeland Security entered into 287(g) agreements with state and local police. This underlines the importance of Comprehensive Immigration Reform being adopted by Congress.
On September 29th, an Arizona Guardian Headline read, “Pearce tries again for anti-illegal immigration package.” According to the Guardian, State Senator Russell Pearce will again attempt to garner the support needed to pass legislation covering five major components:
• Allow a person to sue a government body that acts to limit or restrict the enforcement of federal immigration laws. It includes fines of $1,000 to $5,000 for government bodies that continue the polices after the actions have been filed.
• Make the act of entering or remaining in Arizona in violation of federal law a state crime as well. The measure would allow local law-enforcement authorities to arrest suspected illegal immigrants on state trespass charges, or to turn over suspected illegal immigrants to federal authorities for deportation.
• Provide the state attorney general and county attorneys new subpoena authority in employer sanctions cases.
• Make it illegal for illegal immigrants to solicit day work, and for anyone with an Arizona business license to aid, harbor, conceal or transport illegal immigrants for day work. It includes mandatory fines of $1,000 for every illegal immigrant being transported and the mandatory impoundment of a vehicle used to transport workers.
• Make it a misdemeanor for employers not to sign up use the federal E-Verify system, which is already required for employers.
Former Republican Presidential Candidate Mike Huckabee, while Governor of Arkansas, strongly opposed a proposed Arkansas law that would have denied immigrants public services because he saw the law “as inflammatory…race-baiting and demagoguery…{The bill} inflames those who are racist and bigots and makes them think there’s a real problem. But there’s not.”
Action by Congress to adopt Comprehensive Immigration Reform will reassert the authority of the Supremacy Clause and preempt States and localities from enacting the kind of anti-immigrant, socially inflammatory, and economically self-destructive legislation embraced by Senator Pearce and his followers.
***Based on Research Paper by Karla M. McKanders, The Constitutionality of State and Local Laws Targeting Immigrants, May 2009.
The above passage is commonly referred to as the Supremacy Clause. This section of the U.S. Constitution effectively prohibits States and local governments from making laws that are expressly or impliedly regulated by Congress. When dealing with immigration issues, however, the situation becomes muddled. Do the states have authority to make anti or pro-immigration laws?
In 1952, Congress passed the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). This solidified the federal government’s control over immigration. In 1986, Congress passed the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA), which defined the conditions of employment for immigrant and anti-discrimination provisions preventing employers from discriminating against immigrants while complying with the IRCA. So does this answer our question? Not really.
Although Federal laws preempt State and local authorities’ abilities to make laws on the same subject matter, issues become blurred when the Federal Law does not “expressly” regulate a certain issue. In other words, when the federal government leaves gaps, the states attempt to fill them. For example, Secretary of Homeland Security and former Governor Janet Napolitano indicated that “immigration is a federal responsibility, but signed House Bill 2779 [Legal Arizona Workers Act] because it is abundantly clear that Congress finds itself incapable of coping with the comprehensive immigration reform our country needs.” The question becomes even more convoluted when Congress passed the CLEAR (Clear Law Enforcement for Criminal Alien Removal) Act and Homeland Security entered into 287(g) agreements with state and local police. This underlines the importance of Comprehensive Immigration Reform being adopted by Congress.
On September 29th, an Arizona Guardian Headline read, “Pearce tries again for anti-illegal immigration package.” According to the Guardian, State Senator Russell Pearce will again attempt to garner the support needed to pass legislation covering five major components:
• Allow a person to sue a government body that acts to limit or restrict the enforcement of federal immigration laws. It includes fines of $1,000 to $5,000 for government bodies that continue the polices after the actions have been filed.
• Make the act of entering or remaining in Arizona in violation of federal law a state crime as well. The measure would allow local law-enforcement authorities to arrest suspected illegal immigrants on state trespass charges, or to turn over suspected illegal immigrants to federal authorities for deportation.
• Provide the state attorney general and county attorneys new subpoena authority in employer sanctions cases.
• Make it illegal for illegal immigrants to solicit day work, and for anyone with an Arizona business license to aid, harbor, conceal or transport illegal immigrants for day work. It includes mandatory fines of $1,000 for every illegal immigrant being transported and the mandatory impoundment of a vehicle used to transport workers.
• Make it a misdemeanor for employers not to sign up use the federal E-Verify system, which is already required for employers.
Former Republican Presidential Candidate Mike Huckabee, while Governor of Arkansas, strongly opposed a proposed Arkansas law that would have denied immigrants public services because he saw the law “as inflammatory…race-baiting and demagoguery…{The bill} inflames those who are racist and bigots and makes them think there’s a real problem. But there’s not.”
Action by Congress to adopt Comprehensive Immigration Reform will reassert the authority of the Supremacy Clause and preempt States and localities from enacting the kind of anti-immigrant, socially inflammatory, and economically self-destructive legislation embraced by Senator Pearce and his followers.
***Based on Research Paper by Karla M. McKanders, The Constitutionality of State and Local Laws Targeting Immigrants, May 2009.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
