As Texas defends deportation law, New Hampshire ponders its border – with Canada

Even as Texas’ SB4 flounders in court, Republicans in other state legislatures are picking up the charge to open up state jurisdiction on immigration enforcement. That’s amid arguments about whether the measures will be effective, or even legal.

First Look

Republican lawmakers across the country were already jockeying to push their states deeper into immigration enforcement when the Supreme Court, if only briefly, let Texas enforce a new law giving police broad powers to arrest migrants suspected of crossing the border illegally.

Within hours on March 19, another court blocked the Texas law again. The same day, Iowa passed a similar bill.

In New Hampshire, lawmakers are nearing passage of legislation to let police bring trespassing charges against people suspected of illegally entering the United States from Canada.

Georgia Republicans have advanced a proposal requiring eligible cities and counties to seek agreements to perform some immigration-related enforcement in jails to help the federal government after police accused a Venezuelan man of beating nursing student Laken Riley to death on the University of Georgia campus. Immigration authorities say the man unlawfully crossed into the U.S. in 2022. It is unclear whether he had applied for asylum.

On March 20, the state Senate honored Ms. Riley’s family. During the ceremony, her father, Jason Riley, blamed immigrant-protecting sanctuary policies in Athens, where the University of Georgia is located, for his daughter’s death and urged Gov. Brian Kemp to declare an “invasion,” Texas’ argument to defend a series of escalating measures along the border. Last month, a federal judge in Texas rejected those claims while blocking the state’s new arrest law.

“A man with an evil heart stole her life. He was in this country and in this state illegally,” Jason Riley said. “My vision for every senator in this chamber is that you protect citizens from this illegal invasion.”

Meanwhile, it’s yet to be seen what Republican-led states, many of which are pushing different bills and sending their National Guard members to the border, will embrace the Texas-style bill, particularly if another court ruling favors the policy. Oklahoma isn’t waiting to test the waters – GOP House and Senate leaders embraced the idea of a Texas-style anti-immigration law, with House Speaker Charles McCall announcing plans on March 20 to immediately introduce a similar measure.

The Biden administration is suing to block the Texas measure, arguing it’s a clear violation of federal authority that would cause chaos in immigration law and wreak havoc on international relations.

Tennessee lawmakers are approaching the finish line on a proposal to require law enforcement agencies there to communicate with federal immigration authorities if they discover people are in the country illegally. For the brief time Texas had the all-clear to enforce its law March 19, the Tennessee House and Senate speakers expressed openness to considering a similar policy.

“We are monitoring the Texas situation as Gov. Abbott works to protect his state,” House Speaker Cameron Sexton said.

Muzaffar Chishti, a senior fellow at the Migration Policy Institute, said these kinds of immigration policies are typically driven by political motivation and come with serious complications for resource-strapped law enforcement agencies that lack immigration expertise.

“To train a bunch of state officers in a field of enforcement in which they have zero background and zero training is an operational headache,” Mr. Chishti said.

Under Iowa’s bill, entering the state after previously being denied entry to the U.S. would become an aggravated misdemeanor, or a felony under some circumstances, including during an arrest for a different felony.

“The federal government has abdicated its responsibilities and states can and must act,” Republican Rep. Steven Holt said.

Democratic Rep. Sami Scheetz argued immigration was constitutionally reserved for the federal government.

“Illegal immigration is a serious problem that requires action, yet the approach laid out in this bill misses the heart of what it truly means to address this issue with compassion, wisdom, and effectiveness,” Mr. Scheetz said.

The bill awaiting Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds’ signature would take effect July 1.

New Hampshire’s border bill dealing with Canada, meanwhile, would follow only 21 apprehensions in the state between October 2022 and December 2023, even as the U.S. Customs and Border Protection enforcement area that includes New Hampshire, New York, Vermont, and Maine has seen a dramatic increase in illegal border activity since 2021.

The Republican-led New Hampshire Senate passed the trespassing bill last month. Republicans have a slimmer House majority, but the bill’s sponsor, Senate President Jeb Bradley, expects it to pass.

Even with the Texas law again on hold, the former U.S. representative said he thinks courts are moving toward giving states more authority, boding well for legislation like his.

“The magnitude of the problem has gotten significantly worse,” Mr. Bradley said on March 20. “We can’t wait for Congress.”

Some Democratic-led states are pursuing expansions of immigrant rights, including Maryland, where lawmakers are closing in on a bill to seek a federal waiver to let people buy health insurance through the state’s health care exchange, regardless of immigration status.

In Massachusetts, which has struggled to find shelter for thousands of migrants streaming into the state, a bill is advancing to limit how long homeless people can stay in emergency state shelters to nine months with an additional three months for those employed or enrolled in job training programs.

Earlier this month, Arizona Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs vetoed a bill modeled on the Texas law. Since then, Republican lawmakers have vowed to pass a similar bill and send it to Ms. Hobbs.

Arizona lawmakers are pursuing a measure, which would go to voters for approval and therefore bypass a potential Hobbs veto, that would require local governments that receive state money for welfare programs to use a federal employment verification database to check whether recipients are in the U.S. legally and remove those who aren’t from the program.

Opponents consider Texas’ law the most dramatic state attempt to police immigration since an Arizona law more than a decade ago, key portions of which were struck down by the Supreme Court. That law would have allowed police to arrest people for federal immigration violations, often referred to by opponents as the “show me your papers” bill.

Among the various legislation proposed in GOP-led states, Georgia has an additional bill that would punish cities and counties that Republicans say are using so-called sanctuary policies to illegally harbor immigrants who are in the country without permission by cutting off most state aid to the local government and removing elected officials from office.

Florida has already passed legislation to increase sentences for immigrants in the country illegally who are convicted of driving without a license or committing felonies.

Tennessee additionally is considering whether to allow judges to sentence someone in the country illegally to life without parole for a violent crime involving a deadly weapon or on school property. Another Tennessee proposal would make it a misdemeanor to knowingly or recklessly transport someone who is in the country illegally into the state.

Immigrants were holding an advocacy day on March 19 at Tennessee’s Capitol when the Supreme Court temporary ruling came down, shocking the group. Lisa Sherman Luna, the Tennessee Immigrant & Refugee Rights Coalition’s executive director, said the Texas law sets a “horrifying precedent” for communities and the country.

“How ‘united’ will our states be when they each have different laws on who can call them home?” Ms. Luna said.

This story was reported by The Associated Press. Jeff Amy in Atlanta; Holly Ramer in Concord, New Hampshire; Sean Murphy in Oklahoma City; Brendan Farrington in Tallahassee, Florida; Brian Witte in Annapolis, Maryland; Steve Karnowski in Minneapolis; Steve LeBlanc in Boston; Jacques Billeaud in Phoenix; and Scott McFetridge in Des Moines, Iowa, contributed to this report.