Recent developments in immigration policy and demography Goshen High School September 17, 2012 Dr. Steven M. Nolt

ARIZONA et al. v. UNITED STATES argued April 25, 2012, decided June 25, 2012 Arizona law known as S.B (passed in 2010) Justice Anthony Kennedy: “The National Government has significant power to regulate immigration. Arizona may have understandable frustrations with the problems caused by illegal immigration while that process continues, but the State may not pursue policies that undermine federal law.”

ARIZONA et al. v. UNITED STATES argued April 25, 2012, decided June 25, 2012 Arizona law known as S.B (passed in 2010) Justice Anthony Kennedy: “The National Government has significant power to regulate immigration. Arizona may have understandable frustrations with the problems caused by illegal immigration while that process continues, but the State may not pursue policies that undermine federal law.” Overturned three provisions that – made it a crime to fail to register with the federal government (ruling was 6-2); – made it a crime for an unauthorized immigrant to seek work (ruling was 5-3); – allowed state and local law enforcement officers to arrest anyone on the suspicion that the individual was in the country illegally (ruling was 5-3);

Let stand (by ruling 5-3) – The “show-me-your-papers” provision that requires state and local law enforcement, upon reasonable suspicion, to check the immigration status of anyone stopped for another crime, no matter how minor. – Court said this fourth provision will be unconstitutional if it ends up being selectively enforced (i.e., racial profiling) or if it is used to detain people for an unreasonable period of time while checking their immigration status. – “At this stage … it would be inappropriate to assume” that the provision conflicts with federal law, but that “does not foreclose” constitutional challenges to the law once it has gone into effect. Reaffirmed by U.S. District Judge in Phoenix on Sept. 5, 2012 Also emphasized that the executive branch has the power to set priorities in immigration enforcement.

Indiana SEA 590 Immigration Law, Signed by Governor Mitch Daniels, May 10, 2011 Some of the provisions: Requires state/local government contractors to use E-Verify. Includes incentives for private businesses to use E-Verify. Requires use of the SAVE (Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements) program when distributing state welfare benefits. Allowed law enforcement to arrest individuals who are subject to removal orders or similar proceedings, and to make warrantless arrests of people based only on suspected immigration status. (Additionally, all individuals arrested are fingerprinted and run through a federal database which checks their immigration status individually). Outlaws the use of ID cards issued by foreign consulates. Related law (HEA 1402), signed the same day, bars unauthorized immigrants from accessing college tuition aid.

Indiana SEA 590 Immigration Law, Temporary injunction in June 2011 against … Some of the provisions: Requires state/local government contractors to use E-Verify. Includes incentives for private businesses to use E-Verify. Requires use of the SAVE (Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements) program when distributing state welfare benefits. Allows law enforcement to arrest individuals who are subject to removal orders or similar proceedings, and to make warrantless arrests of people based only on suspected immigration status. (Additionally, all individuals arrested are fingerprinted and run through a database which checks their immigration status individually). Outlaws the use of ID cards issued by foreign consulates. Related law (HEA 1402), signed the same day, bars unauthorized immigrants from accessing college tuition aid.

In late July 2012, following the U.S. Supreme Court ruling on the Arizona law, Indiana’s Republican Attorney General Greg Zoeller said that the state would no longer defend the portions of the law that allow for warrantless arrests based on assumed immigration status. Following the Supreme Court ruling, Zoeller said, “A warrantless arrest under those circumstances is unconstitutional” and “warrantless arrests under those circumstances and justifications will not be defended.” On September 5 three state senators (Mike Delph and two others) asked the U.S. District Court to allow them to defend the parts of the law the attorney general will not. Zoeller is still committed to defending the provision that outlaws ID cards issued by foreign consulates.

President Obama’s Executive Order of June 5, 2012 to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Executive discretion not to pursue those: who arrived in this country before turning 16; have no felony record; have resided here continuously for at least five years; are currently in school or have graduated from high school or obtained an equivalency diploma; or are honorably discharged veterans. But cannot have turned 30 at the time of their application. Those who meet these criteria can apply for a two-year, renewable, deferment from CIS prosecution. They may also apply for temporary authorization to work.

The implications of this action matched, in many ways, the aims of the DREAM Act, which has been introduced in Congress but not passed since The president’s order is unlike the DREAM Act in that it does not (and cannot) address issues of citizenship.

At the national level, significant demographic changes and developments were reported in two recent (May 3 and June 19) studies by the Pew Centers.

Net Migration from Mexico has dropped to zero Pew Research Center, May 3, 2012 report

Why? Appears to be the result of many factors, including: – weaker U.S. job market – slowly improving Mexican economy – heightened border enforcement – rise in deportations – dangers associated with unauthorized border crossings – the long-term decline in Mexico’s birth rate 1960: 7.3 children 2009: 2.4 children

Immigration from Mexico in historical perspective Mexican immigration to the U.S. “has already secured a place in the record books.” In absolute numbers, “no country has ever seen as many of its people immigrate to [the U.S.] as Mexico has in the past four decades. However, when measured … as a share of the immigrant population at the time, immigration waves from Germany and Ireland in the 19th century equaled or exceeded the modern wave from Mexico.” – Pew Research Center report

Immigrants from Asia now largest share of immigrants Pew Report released June 19, 2012

The 2010 Census counted more than 17 million Asian Americans, or 5.6% of the U.S. population. The Asian-American population grew faster than any other group from 2000 to 2010 (46%) and roughly quadrupled from 1980 to 2010.