Lack of Leadership in the Immigration Debate
Michael Zuckerman is an attorney, legal commentator, and author. His latest work entitled "Constitutional Clash: When English-Only Meets Voting Rights" will appear in the Yale Law & Policy Review.
A little-known federal law has escaped the headlines. With the debate focused on Arizona's controversial new immigration law, our elected leaders in Washington have turned a blind eye to the federal laws over which they exercise control.
Long before Arizona passed its law that will soon authorize law enforcement to demand immigration papers from anyone upon "reasonable suspicion" of being an illegal alien, the federal government passed a similar law.
Indeed, tucked away in Title 8 of the U.S. Code is a provision that expressly authorizes federal immigration officers, without a warrant, "to interrogate any alien or person believed to be an alien as to his right to be or to remain in the United States." (See 8 U.S.C. 1357). This is eerily similar to the Arizona law.
But the current debate surrounding immigration policies does not focus on this federal law.
To be sure, many of our elected officials in Washington have been outspoken about the Arizona law. Its passage has both emboldened anti-immigration forces and enraged immigrants' rights groups. It has become a national lightening rod and in some way embodies the entire debate surrounding immigration reform.
One particularly vocal group of critics has been our elected leaders in Washington. While some have voiced their support, countless Congressional Democrats have lambasted Arizona - Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-Arizona) has even called for a boycott of his own state.
Others, such as Rep. Luis Guitierrez (D-Illinois), have engaged in acts of civil disobedience to protest the Arizona law. Rep. Nydia Velazquez (D-New York), chairwoman of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, called the law a form of legalized racial profiling and a blow to civil rights. Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas) analogizes the law to the Jim Crow laws in the 1950s and 1960s. The Attorney General has not ruled out legal challenges in court.
President Obama joined the chorus of critics by calling the law "misguided." He went so far as to declare that the law may "undermine basic notions of fairness we cherish as Americans."
These critics have good reason to be alarmed. The law may well be a recipe for widespread civil rights violations. It is contrary to our core constitutional values.
But, why didn't the outcry start until now? Why haven't these same officials protested the federal law that similarly permits officials to stop an individual upon reasonable suspicion that he or she is an illegal alien.
Where is the outrage?
Many of the same politicians who are speaking out against the Arizona law are the ones who hold the power to change federal law. Instead of (or, rather, in addition to) challenging the Arizona law as "misguided," the President ought to examine the laws that he swore to uphold. As the old saying goes, he who lives in a glass house should not throw stones.
It is true that some of the outrage stemming from the Arizona law is on account of a state intruding into the federal domain of immigration law.
That's a fair point. But, the provocative statements coming from those in
Washington go beyond issues of federalism.
Perhaps it was the extensive media coverage of the Arizona law that prompted politicians in Washington to speak out about its passage. And perhaps the lack of media coverage about the federal government's use of the same controversial tactic explains the silence of our elected leaders. That does not, however, excuse the silence coming from Washington.
Our elected leaders in Washington should add more than a sound-byte to the debate over the Arizona law. They should take decisive action to repeal the federal policy that generally permits an individual to be interrogated upon reasonable suspicion that he or she is an illegal alien.
To discourage states from passing these type of discriminatory laws, our leaders in Washington should start by focusing their efforts on the federal law that authorizes the very same type of discrimination.
By Michael A. Zuckerman:
Special to CBSNews.com
Copyright 2010 CBS. All rights reserved. A little-known federal law has escaped the headlines. With the debate focused on Arizona's controversial new immigration law, our elected leaders in Washington have turned a blind eye to the federal laws over which they exercise control.
Long before Arizona passed its law that will soon authorize law enforcement to demand immigration papers from anyone upon "reasonable suspicion" of being an illegal alien, the federal government passed a similar law.
Indeed, tucked away in Title 8 of the U.S. Code is a provision that expressly authorizes federal immigration officers, without a warrant, "to interrogate any alien or person believed to be an alien as to his right to be or to remain in the United States." (See 8 U.S.C. 1357). This is eerily similar to the Arizona law.
But the current debate surrounding immigration policies does not focus on this federal law.
To be sure, many of our elected officials in Washington have been outspoken about the Arizona law. Its passage has both emboldened anti-immigration forces and enraged immigrants' rights groups. It has become a national lightening rod and in some way embodies the entire debate surrounding immigration reform.
One particularly vocal group of critics has been our elected leaders in Washington. While some have voiced their support, countless Congressional Democrats have lambasted Arizona - Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-Arizona) has even called for a boycott of his own state.
Others, such as Rep. Luis Guitierrez (D-Illinois), have engaged in acts of civil disobedience to protest the Arizona law. Rep. Nydia Velazquez (D-New York), chairwoman of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, called the law a form of legalized racial profiling and a blow to civil rights. Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas) analogizes the law to the Jim Crow laws in the 1950s and 1960s. The Attorney General has not ruled out legal challenges in court.
President Obama joined the chorus of critics by calling the law "misguided." He went so far as to declare that the law may "undermine basic notions of fairness we cherish as Americans."
These critics have good reason to be alarmed. The law may well be a recipe for widespread civil rights violations. It is contrary to our core constitutional values.
But, why didn't the outcry start until now? Why haven't these same officials protested the federal law that similarly permits officials to stop an individual upon reasonable suspicion that he or she is an illegal alien.
Where is the outrage?
Many of the same politicians who are speaking out against the Arizona law are the ones who hold the power to change federal law. Instead of (or, rather, in addition to) challenging the Arizona law as "misguided," the President ought to examine the laws that he swore to uphold. As the old saying goes, he who lives in a glass house should not throw stones.
It is true that some of the outrage stemming from the Arizona law is on account of a state intruding into the federal domain of immigration law.
That's a fair point. But, the provocative statements coming from those in
Washington go beyond issues of federalism.
Perhaps it was the extensive media coverage of the Arizona law that prompted politicians in Washington to speak out about its passage. And perhaps the lack of media coverage about the federal government's use of the same controversial tactic explains the silence of our elected leaders. That does not, however, excuse the silence coming from Washington.
Our elected leaders in Washington should add more than a sound-byte to the debate over the Arizona law. They should take decisive action to repeal the federal policy that generally permits an individual to be interrogated upon reasonable suspicion that he or she is an illegal alien.
To discourage states from passing these type of discriminatory laws, our leaders in Washington should start by focusing their efforts on the federal law that authorizes the very same type of discrimination.
By Michael A. Zuckerman:
Special to CBSNews.com
You forgot to ask them to go after the illegal corporate CEOs and to rescind all the failed free trade agreements.
It?s believed there are approximately 300,000 ?anchor babies? born to illegal immigrants in the United States each year. Babies born in the U.S. to illegals are granted automatic birthright citizenship. Its believe there are curruently around four million in our system now. And this abusive practice cost the U.S. taxpayers BILLIONS per year; as well as other negative consequences for our society.
If you oppose this practice please contact your elected officials. The Birthright Citizenship Act of 2009 (H.R. 1868) has been sponsored and has co-sponsorship (http://forbes.house.gov/Blog/?postid=146107). The Act clarifies citizenship which should end this abusive practice.
You should be able to find contact information for elected officials:
http://www.usa.gov/Contact/Elected.shtml
I drafted the following letter to send to my elected officials ?
feel free to copy and paste any or part of:
Dear Elected Official,
I?m writing you in support of the Birthright Citizenship Act of 2009 (H.R. 1868) as proposed. Unfortunately, it was referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law on 5/26/09 but has not been enacted.
I believe the outdated and abused practice of granting automatic birthright citizenship needs to end immediately. A goal of the Birthright Citizenship Act is to clarify citizenship which would end this abusive practice. This is an Act I agree with and believe should be enacted immediately.
I believe this practice as is provides incentives for illegal immigrants to not only enter but remain in our great country. This comes at the expense of the legal citizens of the United States; not only is it a financial burden on the taxpayers but also strains our healthcare, educational, housing, safety and other societal standards.
Our country, our legal citizens have incurred enough expense, financial and otherwise, of which we cannot continue to afford ? nor should our government, our elected officials continue through inaction or opposition force the legal citizens to continue to do so.
The practice of allowing benefits like social security, healthcare, WIC, welfare, etc. for illegal immigrants also needs to end immediately.
I am a legal citizen of the United States, I pay my taxes and I?m a registered voter. I encourage you to please take a step in the right direction for our country and the legal citizens of the United States by supporting the Birthright Citizenship Act, and making sure it is enacted and enforced.
Thank you for your time. Please contact me if I can be of assistance.
Sincerely,
If America needs outside employees we need to have a program in place that is enforced to avoid most of this mess. We should copy other countries who do this successfully. Documented workers period. Speak English period. America needs to get back to a better track in many areas before it is too late-and it is not too late, and I am saying that living in CA in a heavily populated illegal alien, not gonna learn or speak English, sanctuary area.
Have to show documentation & you are of any skin color or ?race?? Show it quick. Show it because of the times we are living in. Show it because you love America. Show it with pride because American soldiers are protecting us 24/7. We currently have a tsunami of illegal aliens so this is what we have to deal with. What are we waiting for? For something worse than 9-11? Similarly, at the airport. Have to be inspected? Get inspected. I have been checked several times and have had to go thru the see-thru x-ray machine-I have no clue why- and I don?t care-so what? It was never like that before 9-11. These are the times we are in. If any one can?t or won?t show a simple ID that proves they have the legal right to be in our country-then they bring suspicion to themselves & need to be checked out for our safety.
All of the illegal aliens and their families should hush with the noisy marching and remember where they came from and instead of organizing to cry-organize to say THANK YOU to America.
Show America how incredibly grateful for the time they did reside here and thank you for all of the work they were able to obtain & THANK YOU for the new living skills & education & they have gained and kiss the ground here before they all voluntarily, and at no expense to the tax payers, return home to their beautiful countries.
I don't find this surprising!
If Federal lawmakers spent more time reading the laws they pass,
instead of just rubber-stamping them through, THEY'D know this!
But, I agree that there has been a massive lack of leadership
on this issue! But, what are we...the public...going to do about that?
Carry on in your myopia with my blessings....
They will never comprehend. Its not that this fool doesnt understand.
The problem is he's too arrogant to open his own eyes. You can read a book on racism yet until you experience it first hand you will never understand it. If the role was flipped and some senator passed a law allowing for all white men in suits to be interrogated over corporate fraud white American would be overflowing with tea party slobs and
NRA fanatics petitioning in every corner with gun in hand. What do you think would happen if a latin mad did that. You'd see his body on channel seven filled with bullet holes.
The reason immigration laws haven't been enforced is that, while it's politically popular to pass laws to limit immigration, they can't be enforced without hurting powerful economic interests too much. Our country would collapse without cheap labor, both immigrants in the U.S. and workers in China and other countries.
CBS, you are dead on about why the laws have not be enforced. However, I do disagree with you when you state that our country would collapse without cheap labor from the US and abroad. The industrial complex formed after WW2 was done so with the blood and sweat of americans.............there are millions of deadbeat, welfare recipients that should be put to work. Combine that with making corporate america responsible somehow in putting our own people to work and we can solve the problem here on our own shores. Their greed is just as big an issue as immigrant labor.