Set Text Size:

S

S

S

AILA Resources on State Immigration Enforcement Laws

Cite as "AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 12032163 (posted Dec. 28, 2012)"

Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals

On June 15th, Secretary Napolitano announced a new deferred action program for childhood arrivals. Since then the Governors of Arizona, Nebraska and Texas have issued statements or executive orders denying certain state benefits, including drivers licenses, to the beneficiaries of this program.

  • Iowa Department of Transportation press release announcing that the state would not issue driver's licenses or non-operator identification (ID) cards to persons granted Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals status.
  • Arizona Governor Jan Brewer's Executive Order clarifying that individuals granted deferred action under the June 15th memo will not be eligible for Arizona driver licenses or other state benefits. AILA Doc. No. 12082249.
  • Nebraskan Governor Dave Heineman statement clarifying that individuals granted deferred action under the June 15th memo will not be eligible for Nebraskan driver licenses or other state benefits. AILA Doc. No. 12082250.
  • Texas Governor Rick Perry's letter instructing Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott to ensure that all Texas agencies understand that deferred action confers absolutely no legal status to those that qualify. AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 12082251.
Omnibus State Immigration Enforcement Laws

After SB1070 passed, 36 other states attempted to pass harsh immigration enforcement laws, with five states-Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, South Carolina and Utah-successfully passing omnibus laws following the example of Arizona. Court challenges based on preemption and civil rights were filed against all five of these new state laws.

Arizona SB 1070 Court Decisions
Georgia HB 87 Court Decisions

On 08/20/2012 CA11 issued a decision affirming the enjoinment of section 7 of HB 87 and reversing the portion of the order enjoining section 8.

A 6/27/11 order granting Plaintiff's preliminary injunction and blocking important parts of Georgia's "Show Me Your Papers" law, HB 87, in a class action case filed by a coalition of civil rights groups and individual attorneys, including AILA Past President Charles Kuck. AILA Doc. No. 11062730.

On 06/02/11 class action complaint filed by a coalition of civil rights groups and individual attorneys, including the National Immigration Law Center and the American Civil Liberties Union, and AILA Past President, Charles Kuck, challenging Georgia's "Show Me Your Papers" law, HB 87. AILA Doc. No. 11060230.

Alabama HB 56 Court Decisions

On 8/21/12, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals issued decisions in U.S. v. Alabama and HICA v. Bentley-Order that block many of the provisions in Alabama's controversial immigration law, HB 56.

In U.S. v. Alabama, the court blocked sections 10, 11(a), 13(a), 16, 17, and 27. AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 11092842. (Posted 08/22/12.) However, the court upheld sections 12(a), 18, and 30. In HICA v. Bentley-Order, the found that section 28 violates the Equal Protection Clause and remanded to the district court for the entry of a preliminary injunction. AILA Doc. No. 11092842.

On 3/8/12, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals issued an order temporarily enjoining Alabama from enforcing Section 27 and Section 30 of its immigration enforcement law, HB 56. AILA Doc. No. 12030961.

On 11/21/11, AILA filed an amicus brief urging the court to affirm the decision of the district court blocking key portions of Alabama HB 56 from taking effect. AILA Doc. No. 11120171.)

On 10/14/11, the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in Atlanta ordered an injunction blocking two provisions of HB 56 from remaining in effect while the appeal of the district court's ruling continues. AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 11092842. The two provisions enjoined are:

  • Section 10, making it a state crime to be undocumented in the state of Alabama;
  • Section 28, requiring public school students to prove their immigration status or be presumed undocumented.
  • The court also allowed two provisions to remain in effect while the legal challenge continues:

  • Section 30, making it a felony for undocumented individuals to enter into business transactions with the state or any subdivision thereof;
  • Section 12, allowing local law enforcement to stop, detain, or arrest anyone they suspect of being undocumented.

On 9/28/11, in three separate cases Hispanic Interest Coalition of Alabama v. Bentley, Parsley v. Bentley, and U.S. v. Alabama, Chief U.S. District Judge Sharon Blackburn blocked certain portions of Alabama's controversial immigration law, HB 56, from taking effect, ruling that there is a substantial likelihood that the U.S. government can establish that the provisions are preempted by federal law. AILA Doc. No. 11082842., AILA Doc. No. 11092842. AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 11092842. (Posted 9/28/11.) The provisions enjoined include (but are not limited to):

  • Section 8: Prohibiting undocumented aliens from attending or enrolling in an Alabama public post-secondary educational institution.
  • Section 11(a): Prohibiting undocumented aliens from applying, soliciting, or performing work as an employee or independent contractor.
  • Section 11(f): Prohibiting drivers from blocking or impeding traffic while attempting to hire or hiring/picking up passengers for work at a different location.
  • Section 11(g): Prohibiting persons from entering a vehicle in order to be hired for work at a different location if the vehicle blocks or impedes traffic.
  • Section 13: Prohibiting concealing, harboring, transporting, etc. of undocumented aliens. Judge Blackburn upheld key portions of H.B. 56, including provisions authorizing local police to inquire about detainees' immigration status and requiring public schools to verify students' immigration status.
Additional Resources
 
Copyright © 1993–2014, American Immigration Lawyers Association.
Suite 300, 1331 G Street, NW, Washington, DC 20005
Copyright & Reprint Policy
Contact Us