1 Carpenter Zack Carpenter Tonya Capps English 10, period 7 20 October 2011 The Repeal of HB65 The Alabama

legislative government recently went ahead with HB56, a law to aid in the fight to stop illegal immigrants from entering the state. While this law has many proponents, many would argue that it has more opponents. The proponents include many employers, religious institutions, and those who see how morally wrong this law is. The Alabama legislative government should repeal HB56 due to the economic impacts it will have, the constitutional rights it is infringing upon, and the poor wording of the bill. The economic impacts of this bill would be devastating. Even though the law hasnt fully taken effect in Alabama yet, the effects are already being felt (Josson). Ever since the massive tornado in Alabama, it will be harder to find workers to rebuild homes, or at least, to do the things average Americans would not do, like laying roofing. Alabamas agriculture commissioner has said that farmers are already feeling the effects also (Josson). The squash many farmers planted before the plan for HB56 went public is currently rotting in the fields. Jay Reed commented on this situation saying, Now that the law has passed and is in effect, who will fill these labor-intensive jobs? To date, we havent had anyone waiting in line (Josson). The reason many Americans refuse to take these jobs is due to the fact that, while yes, the jobs might meet minimum wage requirements, they fail to provide a

2 Carpenter livable wage, at least for the United States (Stevenson). Many opponents of this bill argue that the US government should look at programs where immigrant workers are legally brought over for a period of time to work these low paying jobs. If the government went this route, it would decrease illegal immigration, because the workers wouldnt need to cross the border illegally if they can easily come to work for periods of time legally. Opponents also argue that we have yet to feel the full force of this bill. Georgia passed a law very similar to HB56 earlier this year. Due to their law, famers in Georgia face severe labor shortages (Nowrasteh). If Georgia does not get an injunction placed on this law they would be risking over $300 Million of produce already planted, thus creating food shortages. Farmers can not raise the wage of these jobs to make them more attractive because farmers have low profit margins to begin with (Nowrasteh). Georgia made an attempt to fix its problem by having criminal offenders and probationers to work in the fields. This program failed miserably. The Criminals couldnt keep up with the migrant workers (Nowrasteh). On one of the test farms the fastest probationer filled only 104 buckers of cucumbers, in the entire day, while many of the foreign workers filled over 200 by midday. This program failed because the criminals have nothing to work for. Theyre making little to nothing, which is hardly fair in the first place (Nowrasteh). The proponents of the bill argue that it breaks many constitutional rights of the people, such as the fourteenth amendment. The fourteenth amendment protects the rights of life, liberty, and property. Opponents would like to argue that this only

3 Carpenter applies to United States citizens; however, this is not true. The fourteenth amendment provides a very broad definition of what is and what is not a United States Citizen. It actually does not define the terms citizen, immigrant, or alien. While a judge did not block majority of the bill, she did block a few sections that she decided were unconstitutional. For Example, the state cannot block an illegal immigrant from enrolling in a public university. They also cannot stop businesses from deducting the wages they pay to unauthorized aliens from their state taxes (Roop). The Department of Justice originally argued that the law does the job of the federal governments constitutionally defined role in immigration regulation (Roop), and therefore should have an injunction placed upon it, and later be repealed. Many also argue that the bill is simply written poorly, as well as being to vague. Upon inspection of the bill one can find many loopholes in the bill itself. For example, in section 21 of HB56 it states that an illegal immigrant shall not be deported if they are involved in any legal disputes (HB56). So, essentially, an illegal immigrant would be able to get a ticket for speeding, dispute the ticket and take it to court. Once the ruling has been made, they would legally be allowed to appeal the ruling. So essentially, an illegal immigrant could stay in the United States indefinitely. The Bill also states that a single official of the state or any political subdivision of the state may not decide in an alien is lawfully present (HB56). No one has been able to offer any explanation as to what this means (Roop). Many have

4 Carpenter offered the though that a panel is to be formed who will decide on the status of any immigrant thought to be in the United States illegally. Essentially, the fate of Alabama lies in the hands of this bill. If the bill continues to remain in effect it will destroy the economy (Nowrasteh), break the current laws in place (Roop), and provide a lawful weakness to the state. Many opponents of the law its self are actually a proponent of immigration reform; however, this law simply does not meet the standard. In order for Alabama to remain a economic and culturally rich state, changes have to be made.

5 Carpenter

Bibliography
Alabama HB 56 Lyman, Brian. Parts of Alabama immigration law to go forward. 28 September 2911. 28 September 2011 <http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2011-0928/alabama-immigration-law/50589580/1>. Nowrasteh, Alex. Alabama's Immigration Law Is a Train Wreck. 2 September 2011. 26 September 2011 <http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/09/02/alabamasimmigration-law-is-train-wreck/>. Roop, Lee. Federal judge refuses to block most of Alabama immigration law. 29 September 2011. 29 September 2011 <http://blog.al.com/breaking/2011/09/federal_judge_throws_out_xxxx.html>. Stevenson, Keira. Immigration Reform and Border Patrol. 19 June 2008. 29 September 2011 <http://web.ebscohost.com/pov/detail?vid=4&hid=123&sid=929f9a9e-7247-441eaa21-6263e7d18d38%40sessionmgr112&bdataJnNpdGU9cG92LWxpdmU%3d#db=pwh&AN=23729036>.