Ian Gordon

Ian Gordon

Copy Editor

When not wrangling copy for the MoJo crew, Ian writes about immigration, sports, and Latin America. His work has appeared in ESPN the Magazine, Wired, and Slate. Got a comment or a tip? Email him: igordon [at] motherjones [dot] com.

Get my RSS |

Mapping the Battle Over Arizona-Style Immigration Laws

| Tue Jun. 26, 2012 3:00 AM PDT

As MoJo's Adam Serwer reported Monday, the Supreme Court voted down three of four provisions of Arizona's controversial immigration law, SB 1070, but allowed one harsh measure to stand: The court upheld (for now)* section 2B, which requires law enforcement officers to determine the immigration status of suspects during lawful stops, detentions, or arrests. Along with Arizona, five other states—Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, South Carolina, and Utah—have similar "show your papers" laws on the books. Meanwhile, from 2010 to 2011, 30 state legislatures rejected bills modeled after Arizona's.

This year, with the uncertainty surrounding the impending court decision and with legislators unwilling to deal with the type of fallout seen in Alabama, only five states introduced such legislation: Kansas, Mississippi, Missouri, Rhode Island (PDF), and West Virginia. The Missouri, Mississippi, and West Virginia bills failed; Kansas' regular legislative session has ended without action on the bill, and the same outcome appears likely in Rhode Island, whose session is over July 2. (Four of the five states—Rhode Island excluded—had already tried and failed to pass similar bills previously.)

Following Monday's Supreme Court ruling, Nebraska state Sen. Charlie Janssen, sponsor of a 2011 Arizona-style bill, told the Associated Press he was unsure if he'd repropose it moving forward, saying, "I certainly wouldn't bring something back that the US Supreme Court just shot down." But Mississippi Republican state Rep. Becky Currie, cosponsor of the state's HB 488 (PDF), is undaunted. She told the Jackson Clarion-Ledger that the ruling merely would affect how she wrote future anti-immigrant legislation. Currie also told the paper that she expected a future Mississippi immigration bill to have a "self-deportation effect": "As soon as the bill passes, illegal immigrants will leave the state."

Correction: This article initially claimed that the Supreme Court upheld section 2B, which is incorrect. Read Serwer's Tuesday post to see why.

Advertise on MotherJones.com

Immigration Hardliners Are Eyeing a New Tactic

| Thu Dec. 22, 2011 4:00 AM PST

It's been a frenetic year in the battle over state laws on immigration enforcement. The Supreme Court recently announced that it will review Arizona's controversial immigration law, SB 1070, and the Department of Justice has lawsuits pending against Alabama, South Carolina, and Utah, regarding harsh laws of their own. The National Conference of State Legislators reports that state lawmakers introduced more than 1,600 bills and resolutions relating to immigration and immigrants in 2011, up from about 1,400 in 2010.

Even with immigration hardliners hopeful that the Supreme Court will overturn an injunction blocking key provisions of the Arizona law, there are indications that in the coming year they may shift tactics to press for an immigration crackdown. In a USA Today article on Tuesday, reporter Alan Gomez wrote that conservative state legislators have begun turning away from the all-encompassing laws that followed the signing of SB 1070 last April. Instead, according to the bill's architect, Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, they hope to bring a specific part of Alabama's HB 56 to their own states:

Kobach said Alabama was the first state to invalidate all contracts entered into with illegal immigrants. A strict reading of the law could mean that any contract, including mortgages, apartment leases and basic work agreements, can be ruled null and void.

"That is one that has a much greater effect than some people might expect at first glance," Kobach said. "Suppose an illegal alien is doing some roofing business and wants to rent some equipment. Some short-term or long-term rental suddenly becomes more difficult to do."

As Gomez pointed out, a federal judge already decided that Alabama cannot use the provision to keep illegal immigrants from renewing mobile-home permits. Apparently, that won't stop other state-level pols, like Pennsylvania's Daryl Metcalfe, the Republican founder of the restrictionist State Legislators for Legal Immigration, from introducing similar measures in 2012:

[Metcalfe] said the recent success of Alabama banning contracts and business transactions by illegal immigrants has placed them on his "wish list" for the upcoming session.

"That's a very good way to expand the fight to shut down access to revenue that they get," he said.

Metcalfe's wish list, it turns out, is quite different from that of the six Alabama religious leaders who called on Gov. Robert Bentley to repeal HB 56 "in the spirit of the Christmas season." Bentley declined to support the repeal effort, responding that "there is nothing unkind, unjust, or unwarranted about asking everyone in Alabama to obey the law."

Fri Apr. 5, 2013 12:39 PM PDT
Tue Mar. 5, 2013 3:57 PM PST
Fri Feb. 1, 2013 12:59 PM PST
Sun Dec. 23, 2012 4:11 AM PST
Thu Dec. 22, 2011 4:00 AM PST
Mon Nov. 7, 2011 3:25 PM PST
Tue Oct. 25, 2011 3:00 AM PDT
Wed Oct. 19, 2011 1:43 PM PDT
Wed Aug. 24, 2011 3:00 AM PDT
Mon Aug. 1, 2011 3:17 PM PDT
Wed Sep. 28, 2011 3:00 AM PDT