The Quote Below—More Misinformation from the Media
“Listening to Iowa Republicans talk about illegal immigration, their horror at how President Joe Biden directs federal resources and policies with regard to borders is palpable. Just as obvious, though, is the strength of belief among Republicans nationwide that contrasting Biden with Donald Trump on immigration is among their most promising paths to victory in November’s general election.
“It is in that context that Gov. Kim Reynolds is posed to sign into law into law a bill that sounds ‘tough, ‘but almost certainly will change nothing for, at minimum, many months. It will change nothing because it plainly is incompatible with federal law. . . .
“Besides the practical impotence of the bill, its operation, if it eventually took effect, would not make Iowa better. It would create more work and potentially expense for local law enforcement and it would punitively deny rights to migrants without documentation.
“Iowa should have left well enough alone. Once the bill is signed, a legal challenge and judicial injunction should follow promptly.
“Senate File 2340 creates a crime called “illegal reentry.” Migrants who have previously been deported or denied entry to the United States could be arrested if they’re found in Iowa. The penalties are geared toward getting defendants out of the country: . . .
“The legal problems this poses are considerable, but it’s worth weighing practical concerns at the outset. Undocumented immigrants’ distrust of law enforcement would presumably increase if state law empowers and encourages them to enforce this law. And would people who do have permission to be in the country be more likely to be questioned over their status? Do local police need more work? . . .
“As for the legal side: The U.S. Supreme Court decided in 2012 that states are not permitted under the Constitution to freelance their own immigration-enforcement schemes, turning back an aggressive Arizona law. U.S. District Judge David Ezra last month ruled that Texas law suffered from the same defect as Arizona’s. . . .”– Iowa Isn’t Getting Tough on Immigration: This Bill Is All Politics, Editorial, Des Moines Register, 3/31/24 [Link]
Fact Check of Above Quote: This editorial insinuates that the Iowa bill is a cynical ploy by Republicans to gain electoral support. Another perspective is that these Republicans are responding to legitimate public alarm (which should happen in a Democratic society) and are seeking ways to address illegal immigration at the state level. The reason they are doing it there is that the federal government under Joe Biden has almost completely abdicated its responsibility to control our border. In this situation, state action is better than no action.
Contrary to what the editorial implies, the 2012 Supreme Court ruling against Arizona’s state immigration law is not a principle set in stone forever. The Supreme Court has significantly changed its stance on issues in the past. Perhaps that could happen again, if and when the present Court considers recently-passed state immigration laws. A different kind of ruling might emerge because, since 2012, the make-up of the Court has changed significantly and the crisis on the border has gotten a great deal worse.
The editorial expresses concern that the Iowa law would deny “rights” to illegal aliens. And just what rights should these lawbreakers have? American citizens should have the right to see the laws of their country enforced. Another concern of the editorialist is that the law would cause illegal aliens to distrust law enforcement. Is that bad thing? Maybe it would encourage them to leave the state. Despite whatever expenses the law entails, it sends the needed message that lawbreakers aren’t welcome.