- Link:
- http://hdl.handle.net/10161/5125
- Collection:
-
- Subjects
- Immigration Legislation North Carolina Public Policy State
- Creator:
- Miller, R. Jason
- Contributor:
- Taylor, Thomas W.
- Description
- Despite no significant movement toward
comprehensive federal immigration reform since 2007, stakeholders
from virtually all points on the political spectrum continue to
call for an overhaul. In the meantime, states have increasingly
come to participate in enforcing federal immigration law. One
program advancing this trend is 287(g), under which state and local
law-enforcement authorities—including several in North
Carolina—partner with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement in
order to help enforce federal immigration law. Another is E-Verify,
a federally administered program that allows employers to use
certain identifying documents to verify the residency status of
employees; many states—including North Carolina—have made use of
the E-Verify program mandatory for public employers, private
employers, or both. Many state legislatures have recently gone one
step further in the direction of enforcing immigration law by
enacting a wave of major state immigration laws. Arizona led the
charge with its 2010 Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe
Neighborhoods Act (popularly known as “SB 1070”); Utah, Georgia,
Indiana, Alabama, and South Carolina soon followed suit. These laws
have proven controversial, and challenges in the federal court
system have so far met mixed results. The major common provisions
require law-enforcement officers to determine the immigration
status of anyone involved in a lawful stop, detention or arrest or
anyone about whose immigration status a reasonable suspicion
exists; create a presumption of lawful presence upon presentation
of an identification card; and prohibit state and local law
enforcement from interfering with federal enforcement of
immigration. These and other provisions of these laws are discussed
in Part II.B of this report. The Utah law includes several unique
provisions. One creates a new temporary–guest-worker program in
which currently unauthorized residents can, among other
requirements, pay a fine and stay legally in the state. The law
also creates two pilot programs, one allowing current citizens to
sponsor immigrants for residency and another creating a partnership
between Utah and the Mexican state of Nuevo Léon to facilitate
migrant laborers filling jobs in Utah. Part III discusses
immigration in North Carolina and recent legislation addressing it.
The population of North Carolina grew by 1.3 million people between
2000 and 2009. Sixteen percent of this population growth is
attributable to immigration from other countries, and these
immigrants are overwhelmingly Hispanic. Between 2000 and 2010, the
number of Hispanic North Carolina residents more than doubled to
800,120 (8.4 percent of the population). Recent North Carolina
legislation on immigration has both mandated the use of E-Verify by
all employers and extended in-state community-college tuition rates
to certain U.S. nonresidents. With the new Republican majority in
both houses of the North Carolina General Assembly and the
formation of the House Select Committee on the State’s Role in
Immigration Policy, serious consideration of omnibus immigration
legislation seems likely, leading to the question addressed by this
report: What policy should North Carolina adopt regarding
state-level enforcement of immigration law? Part V of this report
outlines four responsive policy options: A. Pass a law similar to
Arizona’s Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act or
Alabama’s Beason-Hammon Alabama Taxpayer and Citizen Protection
Act; B. Pass a law similar to Utah’s provisions for a guest-worker
program and migrant-worker and sponsorship pilot programs; C.
Require or encourage increased participation in the 287(g) program
and greater enforcement under the current state-law framework; and
D. Require a study on the state-level effects of immigration and
accompanying recommendations, potentially leading to a long
phase-in process for any new immigration laws. Part IV discusses
the four criteria against which each of these options should be
measured: A. Political feasibility; B. Effect on labor pool; C.
Monetary cost; and D. Fairness. Part VI analyzes each of the four
policy options numerically and descriptively according to the four
criteria and includes a table compiling the scores. Part VII
includes the report’s recommendations: Oppose any legislation
similar to Arizona’s Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe
Neighborhoods Act or Alabama’s Beason-Hammon Alabama Taxpayer and
Citizen Protection Act; If such a bill is passed, support the
addition of Utah-style labor provisions and study provisions
potentially leading to a long phase-in; and If such a bill is not
passed, support independent legislation including Utah-style labor
provisions.
- Type
- Masters' project
- Language
- en_US
- Access:
- Instructions in case access is denied
Site powered by:
