It seems that some people in my home state of Arizona haven’t been appreciating the state’s hardening stance toward the problem of illegal immigration. Here’s an NPR flashback from November of last year:

The federal government may be putting the squeeze on illegal workers, but a number of states are targeting the other side of the employment equation.

Business owners in Arizona could be facing the nation’s harshest law against employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants.

It isn’t known yet whether a federal judge will allow Arizona’s employer sanction law to take effect Jan. 1. The law says any business that knowingly hires a worker who is in the country illegally will have its business license suspended. For a second offense, the business’ license could be revoked.

That is a far stiffer penalty than the rarely imposed federal fines for similar offenses.

[…]

Dry wall contractor Bill Valenzuela said that, as a business owner, he already has a lot of work to do before the end of the year. He must collect money to make payroll and fill out all of the records for the Internal Revenue Service, the city and the county. Having to meet additional state mandates would be a burden, he said.

Valenzuela said the legislators who thought up the law have never run a business.

‘What experience have these people had that are passing these laws in Phoenix?’ he asks. ‘Have they given it a thought? Have they lived it?’

Valenzuela is talking about the “burden” he faces when he hires a worker, mainly filing the standard federal forms and checking a job applicant’s documents against the federal government’s Basic Pilot, or E-Verify, program.

And apparently he considers the burden to be way too HAAAAAARRRRDDD! The whining continues on NPR:

‘We have 140,000 businesses in Arizona. Every time they hire someone, they have to go through this procedure, and it was never meant to be mandatory,’ said Julie Pace, a Phoenix attorney who represents 12 major business groups opposing the law — contractors, farmers, hotel owners and state and local chambers of commerce.

The groups sued to stop the law from taking effect, arguing that it is unconstitutional because only the federal government can make immigration law. And they say the law’s economic consequences are being felt even though it hasn’t taken effect.

‘People are concerned about starting businesses in Arizona. We’ve already seen a loss of companies coming here. They’re shutting down, or they’re taking their money to different states to open their businesses,’ Pace said.

State legislators and Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano said they passed the law because it is what voters want. [Emphasis added.]

So employers were crying about the Arizona law. Yeah, I’m sure they were really, really concerned that the mighty state of Arizona was trying to usurp the power of the Federal government. Yep.

Or were they arguing that the Arizona law would hurt the bottom line?

 “The law’s economic consequences are being felt even though it hasn’t taken effect”, eh? Well, isn’t a law established exactly for the reason of affecting some sort of consequence? A consequence that the voters want, perhaps?

Many times the economic interests of business are the primary mover behind the establishment of a new law. This time, however, the decision went against the narrow interests of business. And the business owners are crying about it.

And this time, the courts are coming down in favor of the state, and not business owners. Let’s come back to the present and look at a piece from the NYT:

On Thursday, a federal judge in Arizona ruled against a lawsuit by construction contractors and immigrant organizations who sought to halt a state law that went into effect on Jan. 1 imposing severe penalties on employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants. The judge, Neil V. Wake of Federal District Court, methodically rejected all of the contractors’ arguments that the Arizona law invaded legal territory belonging exclusively to the federal government.

And the Associated Press:

PHOENIX — A federal judge on Thursday upheld an Arizona law that prohibits businesses from knowingly hiring illegal immigrants and rescinds the business licenses of those that do.

The ruling by the judge, Neil V. Wake of Federal District Court, was a defeat for employers who argued that it was an unconstitutional effort by a state to regulate immigration.

The ruling was a victory for advocates of tougher immigration enforcement who reject the position that immigration enforcement is a federal responsibility.

Judge Wake rejected arguments by business groups that federal immigration law severely restricted Arizona’s ability topunish people who knowingly employed illegal immigrants.

He concluded that the Arizona law did not conflict with federal immigration law, which he said specifically let states regulate business licensing.

Boo frickin’ hoo for business.

And boo frickin’ hoo for the illegal aliens, too. And it seems that the consequences this law was intended to effect are already being felt by both business and the illegal alien community. There’s already evidence that hundreds, if not thousands, of illegal aliens are packing up, leaving Arizona, and heading to Texas….

Technorati Tags: Arizona, hardening stance, problem, illegal immigration, federal government, putting the squeeze, illegal workers, number of states, employment, Business owners, law against employers, knowingly hire illegal immigrants, federal judge, employer sanction law, business license suspended, revoked, stiffer penalty, federal fines, Dry wall contractor, Bill Valenzuela, business owner, Internal Revenue Service, legislators, Phoenix, burden, Basic Pilot, E-Verify, Julie Pace, unconstitutional, immigration law, economic consequences, State legislators, Janet Napolitano, what voters want, usurp, hurt the bottom line, judge, Neil V. Wake, Federal District Court, legal territory, federal judge, regulate immigration, immigration enforcement, federal responsibility, punish

Bookmark: