home

H.R. 4437: A Bad, Bad Border Bill

Bump and Update: The Senate Judiciary Committee will begin debating the Senate version of H.R. 4437 on Monday. It has already passed the House.

Update: From Common Dreams:

Apparently drowned out by the shrill charges and counter-charges in the immigration debate is a simple truth articulated by George Hunsinger, McCord professor of theology at Princeton Theological Seminary and coordinator of Church Folks for a Better America. He told us,

"No human being -- whether citizen or non-citizen -- should be placed outside the protections of the law. No one who performs needed work should be denied fair wages and decent conditions. A society that exploits immigrants for their labor while declaring them illegal is caught in a tangle of contradictions."

Update: (3/25) Barbara Boxer slams the bill:

"It's anti-faith based,'' Boxer said. "It's inhumane. Sensenbrenner is inhumane.''

More details on the bill are available from the ACLU here and here. As for what's wrong with employment verification programs, the ACLU explains here.

AILA weighs in.

H.R. 4437 goes far beyond advancing a wrongheaded approach to immigration reform--it also subverts our democracy's deeply held values, which are founded on fundamental principles such as the right to a day in court, checks and balances, and freedom from unjust and arbitrary detention. It criminalizes unwitting violations of immigration status-for example, a university student on a student visa whose course load drops below the required number of hours. Additionally, H.R. 4437 sharply restricts judicial review, broadly expands mandatory detention policies, and, outrageously, broadens the definition of alien smuggling and harboring to reach family members, employers, teachers, and immigrant advocates.

****
Original Post with details of H.R. 4437:(12/15/06):

The ACLU reports that the House as early as today will take up James Sensenbrenner's doozy of an anti-immigration bill. (HR 4437, the "The Border Protection, Antiterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005," which also includes HR 4312, the "Border Security and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2005." )

The American Civil Liberties Union today urged the House of Representatives to oppose a border security bill that fails to properly address the issue of illegal immigration, undermines due process and creates a federally mandated "permission slip" for all Americans. This sweeping legislation has not been thoroughly examined by Congress, and yet could be considered as early as today

"Lawmakers have not had enough time to consider the enormous ramifications of this faulty bill; it must be rejected," said Caroline Fredrickson, Director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office. "This legislation would place an unprecedented burden on all American workers and American businesses, creating a federally mandated requirement for citizens as well as immigrants to get a permission slip from the federal government before they can take a job."

Requiring a "Mother May I" to go to work?

The legislation would create a sea-change in federal employment rules by requiring all workers in the country to obtain a federal agency's permission to work. All employers would be required to participate in a national employment eligibility verification program in an expansion of the faulty but voluntary "Basic Pilot" program in current law. Like Basic Pilot, the new program would use an Internet-based system to check the names and social security numbers of all employees -- citizens and non-citizen alike -- against a Department of Homeland Security database.

It gets worse:

... the bill gives certain low-level immigration officials broad authority to ignore due process and expel individuals suspected of being here without authorization, further militarizes the border and expands mandatory detention rules to apply to many non-citizens arriving at a port of entry or even far from the border.

The specifics of Sensenbrenner's bill are detailed here:

Among other provisions, the bill would:

  • Continues expanding the same border enforcement and militarization strategies that has resulted in over 4,000 migrant death since 1994.
  • Expands the expedited deportation program
  • Drastically expands the definition of an aggravated felony (deportable offense).
  • Requires mandatory detention for all immigrants apprehended at ports of entry or along international borders until removal or a final decision in their case.
  • Sets a minimum bond of $5,000 for anyone with a Notice to Appear.
  • Overturns the Supreme Court's ruling in Zadvydas which limits long-term detention.
  • Renders immigrants affiliated with gangs deportable and inadmissible, mandates their detention, bars them from asylum or Temporary Protected Status; gives the AG authority to designate gang members for immigration purposes.
  • Limits immigrants' access to the circuit courts by creating a special review process for federal court appeals of immigration cases.
  • Makes undocumented immigration status a crime
  • Makes certain provisions of the REAL ID Act retroactive
  • Includes Day Labor Sites in the employment verification system
    And more.

Call your elected officials in Congress. Tell them:

  • You oppose H.R. 4437, the "Border Protection, Antiterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act" and urge them to stop it from becoming law.
  • This legislation will result in mass violation of civil rights and create huge obstacles to genuine legalization reforms that would benefit our communities.
  • The Sensenbrenner bill deepens the decade-old border enforcement stratregy which has been disasterous and costly.
  • Sensenbrenner's immigration enforcement proposal will not work and only result in more migrant deaths at the U.S.-Mexico border and lead to the erosion of our civil liberties and civil rights.

[graphic by monk]

< Koufax Liberal Blog Award Voting Ends Sunday | 500,000 March in LA : Sensenbrenner Go Home >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Re: H.R. 4437: A Bad, Bad Border Bill (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:07:03 PM EST
    TL: I am sure it was just a small oversight, but it seems to be a bill targeting illegal immigration. You make it sound like all immigrants are being targeted. If you believe all immigrants are being targeted (not just illegal), can you show a link to the spot in the bill that says that? I just know you would not want to muddy the waters between legal and illegal immigrants. It appears that the NNIRR web site has the same problem. They should check their work before putting out bad informaition that will be repeated.

    Re: H.R. 4437: A Bad, Bad Border Bill (none / 0) (#2)
    by scarshapedstar on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:07:03 PM EST
    Gee whiz, I'm glad we have the small government right-wing Republicans in charge. If the big government Democrats had their way, you'd have to ask the government for permission to go anywhere. Thankfully things are completely different!

    Re: H.R. 4437: A Bad, Bad Border Bill (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:07:04 PM EST
    Wile nails it, but just for fun let's examine this bit: Continues expanding the same border enforcement and militarization strategies that has resulted in over 4,000 migrant death since 1994 Exactly how many Americans have died trying to sneak into Mexico? I'd say the number is near zero, because almost everyone realizes just how difficult it would be to be an illegal alien in Mexico. So, if it were very difficult to come to the U.S. as an illegal alien, many fewer would try and there would be many fewer illegal crosser deaths. Yet, both corrupt employers and "liberals" try to make it as easy as possible to live here as an illegal alien. Both groups send a welcoming message to illegal aliens, encouraging them to try to cross the border. It's a bit like standing on the other end of a rickety rope bridge, yelling at people on the other side to "come on over!" If there were no illegal immigration, there would be no deaths. Perhaps "liberals" should aim for that instead of being complicit in all those deaths.

    Re: H.R. 4437: A Bad, Bad Border Bill (none / 0) (#4)
    by janinsanfran on Sat Mar 25, 2006 at 01:01:40 PM EST
    Wile et al.: All immigrants (except maybe Canadians and white Europeans) are targetted by the social effects of restriction laws like this. They license discrimination and exploitation at all levels. They make it very hard for immigrants, legal or illegal, to get treated as anything other than disposable garbage. The distinction you refer to is unsustainable. Families are made of up of people in both legal categories -- how should the citizen children of the undocumented be treated? It doesn't work in real life anything like what our laws say; that is why there is a problem. See story on the San Francisco hunger strike here.

    Re: H.R. 4437: A Bad, Bad Border Bill (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Mar 25, 2006 at 02:31:24 PM EST
    There is already a legal process in place to allow workers to come to the US. They can get 'H' visas with a sponsor (an employer who wants to hire them). The only reason exploiting businesses don't want the bill is because they don't want to pay these people minimum wage or pay for compensation insurance for them. The undocumented worker, technically, does not exist. Make companies pay fair wages and let the bill pass.

    Re: H.R. 4437: A Bad, Bad Border Bill (none / 0) (#6)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Mar 25, 2006 at 04:38:49 PM EST
    janinsanfran writes:
    Families are made of up of people in both legal categories -- how should the citizen children of the undocumented be treated
    ? Perhaps the illegal aliens should have considered the possible problems involved here before they came into the US and before they had children. I don't feel particulalry responsible for someone else's bad decisions. So, round'em up and send them home with their parents. BTW - White immigrants are required to get a Visa, just like everyone else. scar - I remember two job changes during the Clinton years. Both required a drug test and both required proof of citizenship or current Visa. And no, I'm not playing the "Clinton card," just noting that there is nothing new here.
    All employers would be required to participate in a national employment eligibility verification program
    The part is that the above would now be required.

    Re: H.R. 4437: A Bad, Bad Border Bill (none / 0) (#7)
    by Johnny on Sat Mar 25, 2006 at 05:50:17 PM EST
    The solution is easy. Impeach Bush, hire a president who actually will do something, and make it extremely uncomfortable for any employer who hires, knowingly or unknowingly, illegal immigrants. What is so hard to understand?

    Re: H.R. 4437: A Bad, Bad Border Bill (none / 0) (#8)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Mar 25, 2006 at 07:30:16 PM EST
    All employers would be required to participate in a national employment eligibility verification program in an expansion of the faulty but voluntary "Basic Pilot" program in current law. Like Basic Pilot, the new program would use an Internet-based system to check the names and social security numbers of all employees -- citizens and non-citizen alike -- against a Department of Homeland Security database.
    Gee, if this only aimed at illegal immigrants, than why does MY name have to be checked against the DHS database? I'm amused, but not surprised, to see the "conservatives" on this site supporting this latest massive intrusion by the government into our lives. I guess as long as Republicans are doing it, it's OK, fellas? I do have a "modest proposal" though. It seems that illegal immigrants are willing to risk their lives to come to this country as long as we remain a shining beacon of freedom and opportunity. Get rid of the freedom and opportunity, and people won't want to come here anymore! Brilliant! And the best part? The Bush administration is well on the way to "success!"

    Re: H.R. 4437: A Bad, Bad Border Bill (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Mar 25, 2006 at 08:09:09 PM EST
    Most illegal immigration comes for a better life in America than wherever home was (is). A better life needs funding to pay for it. That means a job. Who controls job entry? Is it the job seeker? Is it the employed worker? Could it be the employer? Do any of you doubt that if we enact and enforce harsh disincentives to hire illegal immigrants against employers (harsh enough to end the hiring of