Another County Passes Its Own Immigration Bill

Posted on 12/9/13
By Esther Yu-Hsi Lee | Via ThinkProgress
(Photo via ThinkProgress)
(Photo via ThinkProgress)

While the House held hearings this week on whether President Obama (D) exceeded his executive powers on immigration policies and whether there are “bio signatures” in outer space (i.e., aliens), the most populous county in Washington state is forging ahead on an immigration-related bill to fill gaps left by Congressional inaction on immigration reform.

Local council members in King County, Washington,  which covers Seattle, passed a measure by a slim margin (5-4) early in December to limit state and local officials from upholding federal laws to detain immigrants arrested for low-level offenses. Immigrants who commit “mid-level offenses” like residential burglary, DUIs, and reckless driving will continue to be detained. The measure will only affect “individuals held in the King County Jail in Seattle or the Maleng Regional Justice Center in Kent.”

According to one study, people who are subject to detainer requests generally stay 29 days longer in jail, while not honoring the detainer request has the potential of saving King County $1.8 million a year.

King County is one of a growing number of localities that has introduced its own immigration-related bills while waiting for a permanent reform fix. Other cities includeChicagoNewarkNew OrleansLos AngelesSan FranciscoWashington D.C., and New York City.

On the state level, Connecticut and California passed the Trust Act, which would similarly grant state and local officials greater flexibility to prioritize collaboration efforts with the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency for immigrants who commit serious offenses. That law would affect 75,000- 100,000 undocumented immigrants living in Connecticut, and 25 to 33 times as many undocumented immigrants living in California. And in September, state officials in Massachusetts introduced its version of the Trust Act, as a way to increase public safety.

In the past year alone, 43 other states have already enacted 146 immigration-related laws and 231 resolutions. But not all of them help to expand immigrant rights — for instance, Republican-controlled legislatures were more inclined to pass enforcement legislation and to extend benefits to legal immigrants. The Indiana state legislature, for instance, moved to require immigrants to include their social security numbers when they apply for identification cards and to require state college applicants and students to verify their legal status.

 

Check Also

As Colorado River Dries, the U.S. Teeters on the Brink of Larger Water Crisis

The levels in the nation’s largest freshwater reservoir, Lake Mead, behind the Hoover Dam and a fulcrum of the Colorado River basin, have dropped to around 25% of capacity. The Bureau of Reclamation, which governs lakes Mead and Powell and water distribution for the southern end of the river, has issued an ultimatum: The seven states that draw from the Colorado must find ways to cut their consumption — by as much as 40% — or the federal government will do it for them.

A Supreme Court Scholar Explains the Impact of Dobbs

The Supreme Court’s decision to reverse 50 years of constitutional protection for the right to get an abortion is more than 200 pages long. Morgan Marietta, a political scientist at the University of Massachusetts, Lowell, and editor of the annual SCOTUS series at Palgrave Macmillan, studies the ideas and ideology of the court. We asked him to illuminate the thinking that lies behind the momentous decision.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.