Progressives for Immigration Reform

June 22, 2010

By Leah Durant

Bloggers have recently begun pointing to California Penal Code 834b, a clause in the California Constitution regarding immigration, in an attempt to demonstrate that those calling for a boycott of Arizona in response to SB 1070 are misguided and hypocritical. California Penal Code 834b is actually part of the controversial Proposition 187 framework that was invalidated by federal court rulings during the 1990s. The law banned illegal immigrants from public schools, health services and welfare rolls. The relevant section of the California code states that:

a) Every law enforcement agency in California shall fully cooperate with the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service regarding any person who is arrested if he or she is suspected of being present in the United States in violation of federal immigration laws.
(b) With respect to any such person who is arrested, and suspected of being present in the United States in violation of federal immigration laws, every law enforcement agency shall do the following:
(1) Attempt to verify the legal status of such person as a citizen of the United States, an alien lawfully admitted as a permanent resident, an alien lawfully admitted for a temporary period of time or as an alien who is present in the United States in violation of immigration laws. The verification process may include, but shall not be limited to, questioning the person regarding his or her date and place of birth, and entry into the United States, and demanding documentation to indicate his or her legal status.
(2) Notify the person of his or her apparent status as an alien who is present in the United States in violation of federal immigration laws and inform him or her that, apart from any criminal justice proceedings, he or she must either obtain legal status or leave the United States.
(3) Notify the Attorney General of California and the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service of the apparent illegal status and provide any additional information that may be requested by any other public entity.
(c) Any legislative, administrative, or other action by a city, county, or other legally authorized local governmental entity with jurisdictional boundaries, or by a law enforcement agency, to prevent or limit the cooperation required by subdivision (a) is expressly prohibited.

It is currently unclear whether the U.S. Department of Justice will challenge Arizona’s SB 1070 in court, but one can draw remarkably similar analogies between California’s Proposition 187 and the current controversy over Arizona’s law. An unjustified level of hysteria by pro-immigration activists beset both laws. While Proposition 187’s stipulations may have gone too far in the eyes of some, it was a perfectly understandable response by Californians to the continuing drain illegal immigration was placing on the state.

At the time of Proposition 187’s passing, California harbored an estimated two million illegal immigrants and California residents were becoming increasingly concerned about the huge costs of illegal immigration. Former California Governor Peter Wilson was the most vocal proponent of Proposition 187. He estimated that California spent 2.9 billion per year for social service provisions for undocumented immigrants and for the incarceration of those convicted of felonies.

By the mid-1990s, it was clear to many Californians that the federal government had fully abdicated its responsibility of enforcing federal immigration laws. By that time, the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA), which made it illegal for employers to hire undocumented aliens, was widely viewed as a failure.

Like Arizona now, the California economy during the early 1990s was battered by a deep recession as unemployment rose to 9.1 percent. Advocates then and now declare that the passage of controversial Arizona and California immigration laws were intended to send a message to Washington, which has neglected its responsibilities of immigration enforcement for decades. Although President Obama and certain congressional leaders have provided lip service, they appear reluctant to take on immigration reform prior to the November 2010 elections. Meanwhile, California, a decade after Proposition 187 was dismissed, is in the worst financial shape in its modern history. Unemployment there is hovering over 12 percent as the state government deals with a perpetual budget crisis that has forced drastic cuts to schools, hospitals and public safety.

Already, the news media has produced anecdotal reports that SB 1070 has driven some illegal immigrants out of Arizona. Similar reports surfaced in California after Proposition 187’s passing. Obviously, Proposition 187 did not make much of a dent in the collective psyche – the illegal immigration population in California swelled by nearly one million after the proposition passed. Although SB 1070 is a step in the right direction, Arizona will need the intervention of federal leadership to fully address the impact that illegal immigration has on the state’s economic welfare.