Georgia to start enforcing tough new immigration law

Ramsey predicted such reform would not affect Georgia’s statute because it was written with the understanding that “federal immigration law lving.” He added that federal authorities, not state officials, are responsible for determining someone’s legal status.

Georgia state and local police may start enforcing one of the most controversial parts of the state’s first time now that a federal judge has lifted a legal hold he placed on it.

The law gives police the option to investigate the suspects they believe have committed state or federal crimes and who cannot provide identification or other information that could help police identify them. It also empowers police to detain people determined to be in the country illegally and take them to jail.

Partly modeled after a similar measure in Arizona, Georgia’s law is aimed at pushing illegal immigrants out of the state. Georgia has the ninth-largest population among states. But it ranked sixth last year for the estimated number of illegal immigrants living within its borders, at 440,000, according to the Homeland Security Department.

U.S. District Court Judge Thomas Thrash placed Georgia’s law on hold before it could go into effect last year after civil and immigrant rights activists sued to block it. Critics say the statute is unconstitutional and that it could interfere with the nation’s foreign diplomacy. They also argue it could lead to racial profiling even though the statute explicitly prohibits that.

The state appealed to the U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta, which reversed Thrash’s ruling in August. On Tuesday, Thrash signed an order complying with the appeals court’s decision.

Thrash’s order could represent the end of the long-running legal battle over this law. But the activists who sued to block it say they won’t hesitate to file suit again if they find evidence police are violating people’s civil rights with it through prolonged traffic stops.

The courts are also concerned about such civil rights violations.

For example, in sustaining a similar law in Arizona in June, the U.S. Supreme Court said detaining people “solely to verify their im status would raise constitutional concerns.”

Atlanta area police agencies have been putting off training and other planning to enforce the law because it has been tied up in federal court. In September, state officials confirmed they were postponing training police officers on the law after learning the legal battle was not over.

State Rep. Matt Ramsey, who sponsored the law, underscored that it is discretionary and predicted police agencies across the state will enforce it differently, based on their manpower.

“It will be on a jurisdiction by jurisdiction basis,” he said in an interview last week.

The same has been true in Alabama, where a similar law has been in effect since last year. Some police agencies there are enforcing the law, while others are not. For example, the police chief in Clanton – a small town between Montgomery and Birmingham – said he stopped enforcing the law partly because it sometimes takes hours for federal authorities to respond to his officers’ queries about the im status of uspects.

Thrash’s order comes as state officials are considering whether to appeal an 11th Circuit Court’s decision against another part of Georgia’s immigration law. That provision would punish people who knowingly transport or harbor illegal immigrants while committing other crimes. The appeals court ruled the measure is pre-empted by federal law, which already prohibits such activities.

Meanwhile, President Barack Obama is pledging to tackle comprehensive reform after his inauguration. Among his goals: creating a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants.

Ir a la nota fuente