Immigration & the 50 States (or at least 2 of them)

Two tidbit in today’s paper remind us of the growing role that state governments are playing in the immigration debate.  First – state leaders are playing a role in shaping the national immigration agenda.  In today’s LATimes, a story by Michael Muskal reports on California Governor Arnold Schwartzenegger’s latest foray into the national immigration discussion.  In this case, he criticized the Congress for the apparent failure to come up with a comprehensive immigration reform package this year.

“I am disappointed at the idea that the federal government has not come up with an agreement to reform immigration laws,” said Schwarzenegger, who is running for his second term. All of the House seats will also be at stake in November.

“I believe it is totally irresponsible for the politicians in Washington D.C. to have failed yet again to pass a comprehensive immigration reform plan and address this national crisis,” he said. “Until our border is secure, I know all Americans share my concern about drug trafficking and illegal immigration, as well as the possibility of terrorists entering our country undetected.”

A link to the full story is here. 

Second, U.S. District Court Judge Roslyn O. Silver of Arizona denied a TRO that would have put a hold on implementation of the voter registration provisions of Arizona’s Prop 200.  The provisions that the lawsuit sought to forestall require voter registration applications to be accompanied by “satisfactory evidence of U.S. citizenship.”  Plaintiffs had urged that the provision violated the National Voter Registration Act.  Judge Silver did not find the argument compelling enough to issue the TRO.  Her opinion, which highlights but one example of how immigration legislation passed by the States can impact national policies, is here:Download gonzales_v_arizona_61906.pdf.

-jmc