Research Paper on U.S. Immigration: A Look at Federal Laws & Reforms Since 1952

Introduction

Immigration in the United States is regulated at the federal level, primarily under the rules formulated in 1952 that passed the Immigration and Nationality Act. In 1986, the federal government enacted the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) to curb illegal immigration, and this act denied some welfare benefits to illegal immigrants and also strengthened sanctions on employers who hired such individuals. Whereas the White House is in charge of enforcing immigration laws, the U.S. Congress is entirely responsible for and has full control over regulations related to immigration. However, there have been cases where state governments attempted to regulate immigration, and the paper will focus on an example of such, explaining the dynamics surrounding it such as the policy issue, the players involved, description of the policy and what it did, the outcome, and the aspects of federalism and the separation of powers involved.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

The U.S. Supreme Court has consistently upheld the federal government's jurisdiction over immigration laws, and this has overruled attempts by state or local legislatures to single out immigrants. Moreover, the general interpretation of the Supremacy Clause of the United States is that federal laws outdo state laws, apart from some matters constitutionally left for the states. Many states have, however, passed legislation limiting the access by undocumented immigrants to public benefits while also directing local and state police to check the legal residential status of those arrested as well as other directives affecting immigrants. Typically, lawmakers that process state laws related to immigration state lack of federal enforcement and the quest to conserve the limited state resources, whereas others cite security concerns.

However, the primary issue is the constitutionality behind such state laws. Whereas state lawmakers have expressed a genuine interest in limiting illegal immigration, there is no clarity of their intention. Conceivably, the most infamous attempt by a state to regulate immigration is the California Senate Bill 54, which was signed into law by California in 2017, also known as the "California Values Act." The California S.B. 54 is an immensely complex package of legislation, and it aimed to combat expansive and issues such as the bilateral communications, sharing of data, and intensive custody of undocumented immigrants between local and federal law enforcement agencies (Misra).

According to its legislative history, it is clear that its essential purpose was to safeguard the many immigrants as they interact with law enforcement agencies. Its primary objective is ensuring that local law enforcement agencies do not facilitate federal immigration enforcement by unnecessarily communicating with authorities from federal immigration or otherwise helping in enforcement efforts. S.B. 54 provides that no resources from local or state are diverted to support any attempts by the federal government in carrying out mass deportations and that schools, hospitals, and courthouses in California are safe spaces for everyone living within the state (Park). According to the Act, police and sheriffs cannot ask about an individual's immigration status (ACLU of Southern California). Having a deportation order or any other immigration violations does not warrant them to arrest you. They cannot use ICE or border patrol agents (immigration agents) as interpreters. Lastly, the police and sheriffs are not allowed to share an individual's personal information such as home address with Border Patrols or ICE unless it is available publicly. The bill got passed in the Senate in a 27-12 vote along party lines with Republicans in opposition and Democrats in support.

There were many players involved in this state bill. Public records requests were sent out to all sheriff's offices and police departments in California by the authors. A review from 169 law enforcement agencies discovered that 40% of them were out of compliance (Misra). Huntington Beach was another key player who sued the state regarding its sanctuary policy, and it won. However, the state filed an appeal. Another group of key players was the California lawmakers, who played the role of passing the sanctuary state bill. They aimed to shield thousands of immigrants who had illegally entered into the U.S. Attorney General also played a key role by attempting to block the law. He did this by trying to withhold the Justice Department grant funds to discourage sanctuary city policies. Moreover, the state senate leader who introduced the bill to the senate cannot be ignored when mentioning players in the law.

The bill was introduced by senate president Pro Tem Kevin de Leon. The Senate and the Assembly then passed it. Finally, it was signed by Governor Brown into law. The following were some of the ultimate outcomes of the law. According to Kopelman, the law prohibited local and state law enforcement from sharing any information with authorities from federal immigration, especially information not available to the general public. The state and local law enforcement were prohibited from using any of their personnel or money in investigating, detaining, interrogating, or arresting persons for immigration enforcement. The law also prohibited state and local law enforcement from allowing federal immigration authorities to use the space in their facilities for any immigration purposes, especially in handling illegal immigrants (Kopetman). There were also provisions limiting how and when state and local enforcement could contract federal immigration authorities. The law granted discretion to local and state enforcement to cooperate even less with authorities from the federal immigration unit as opposed to how the bill authorizes them to, but not more. It also led to ensuring that local law enforcement agencies do not facilitate federal immigration enforcement by unnecessarily communicating with authorities from federal immigration or otherwise helping in enforcement efforts. Is near-universally diagnosed and described by each its supporters and fighters as a sanctuary country bill: protects illegal aliens on the rate of residents, will growth illegal immigration to California, and sends the message that illegal aliens are welcome anywhere within the kingdom.

Conclusion

There are aspects of federalism that were involved in this process. Since the process entailed the separation of powers from the federal government to the state government, there had to be involvement of both the two levels of governments. Immigration federalism was involved, which is the role of states and localities in the making and implementation of immigration laws and policy (Gulasekaram 162). The issue of immigration federalism has become increasingly relevant, and this can be seen in how successful it was in the formation of the California S.B. 54. According to the Public Policy Institute of California, the issue of immigration looms large in the state, and nearly a quarter of U.S population of illegal immigrants live. There are already sanctuary protection is some of the counties in California such as Santa Clara and San Diego. Sanctuary cities are those that have policies in place to limit cooperation federal immigration laws enforcement, and protect local immigrant populations.

Works cited

ACLU of Southern California. "California Values Act (SB 54)," 2020. Retrieved from www.aclusocal.org/en/know-your-rights/california-values-act-sb-54

Gulasekaram, Pratheepan. "Immigration federalism." Controversies in American Federalism and Public Policy. Routledge, 2018. 151-170. Retrieved from www.taylorfrancis.com/books/e/9781315178448/chapters/10.4324/9781315178448-9

Kopetman, Roxana. "California's Sanctuary Law, SB54: Here's What It Is - And Isn't." The Orange Country Register, 2020. Retrieved from www.ocregister.com/2018/05/04/californias-sanctuary-law-sb-54-heres-what-it-is-and-isnt/

Misra, Tanvi. "Are California's Police Departments Defying Its Sanctuary Law?" Citylab, 2019. Retrieved from www.citylab.com/equity/2019/03/california-sanctuary-law-immigrant-enforcement-police-local/585736/

Park, Madison. "In A Trump-Defying Move, California's Senate Passes Sanctuary State Bill." CNN Politics, 2017. Retrieved from www.edition.cnn.com/2017/04/04/politics/california-sanctuary-state-bill-sb-54/index.html