Real Immigration Debate Going On at State and Local Level
Ongoing actions by different cities reflect "the complete failure of federal efforts to deal with legal and illegal immigration," says Noah Pickus
Friday, July 27, 2007
print
|
email
|
digg
|
del.icio.us
Durham, NC -- This week’s announcement by New Haven, Conn., officials that they will provide illegal immigrants with ID cards is the latest indication that this country’s real immigration debate is taking place at the state and local level, says a Duke University professor.
New Haven’s approach is sharply different than that of Hazleton, Pa., where an ordinance was passed that would penalize landlords who rent to illegal immigrants and businesses that hire them. A federal judge is expected to rule soon on the ordinance’s constitutionality.
“These two cities’ approaches are a reflection of the complete failure of federal efforts to deal with legal and illegal immigration, such that the real debate over immigration is now going to be at the state and local level,” said Noah Pickus, the Nannerl O. Keohane Director of the Kenan Institute for Ethics. “At the state and local level, these two approaches reflect communities dealing with the same kinds of issues: the shape of their community, who belongs to it and under what rules.”
Pickus is the author of “True Faith and Allegiance: Immigration and American Civic Nationalism” (2005, Princeton University Press), which examines nationalism and the politics of immigration. He writes extensively on issues of immigration, citizenship and national identity and has advised the Department of Homeland Security, the Pew Charitable Trusts, the Smith-Richardson Foundation, and other public and private organizations.
Pickus said the two cities’ divergent approaches reflect problems encountered at the national level in dealing with immigration.
“There is a complete separation of concerns over law and order from concerns over rights and immigrants’ contributions to the community,” said Pickus, who teaches a public policy course on immigration and citizenship. “Both of these views are valid and important, but the separation of them makes for either harshly punitive or overly inclusionary policies.
“A better alternative would be for local and state entities to focus on rights and responsibilities, ensuring that immigrants become responsible members of the community ranging from observing noise and occupancy ordinances to ensuring their children’s regular attendance at school or learning English.”
