Bill Overview
Title: State Immigration Enforcement Act
Description: This bill authorizes state and local governments to enact and enforce laws that penalize conduct prohibited under federal immigration law. Such state and local laws may only impose civil and criminal penalties that do not exceed the penalties imposed by federal law. The bill also revokes a federal law that preempts (blocks) state and local laws that impose civil or criminal penalties for employing non-U.S. nationals who are not authorized to work in the United States.
Sponsors: Rep. Biggs, Andy [R-AZ-5]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals impacted by immigration legislation
Estimated Size: 15000000
- The legislation permits state and local governments to create and enforce immigration laws similar to federal laws, which would impact immigrants, particularly those without legal immigration status.
- The bill will affect employers across the United States who might face differing state and local regulations in addition to federal law.
- Immigrant families, including those with mixed-status (members with different immigration statuses), will be affected by increased enforcement and potential penalties in more jurisdictions.
- This move to decentralize immigration enforcement can lead to diverse local immigration climates across the U.S., each impacting immigrant communities differently.
- Legal residents and citizens may experience indirect effects, such as economic impact due to labor market changes if immigrant workers are removed.
Reasoning
- The implementation of the State Immigration Enforcement Act could affect various groups differently, with immigrants, especially undocumented ones, being the most directly impacted.
- The budget constraints suggest a targeted enforcement strategy, potentially focusing on areas with higher undocumented populations or more intense labor market impacts.
- Mixed-status families might experience heightened stress due to increased local enforcement actions, affecting their wellbeing even if all family members are not directly undocumented.
- Employers will have to navigate potentially differing state regulations regarding hiring practices, which may cause compliance challenges and financial penalties.
- Non-impacted individuals might still engage with the policy through social or economic ramifications, such as labor market shifts or changes in local service demand.
Simulated Interviews
undocumented worker (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I fear the enforcement will make it difficult for me to provide for my family.
- Increased local penalties could mean losing my job.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 8 |
business owner (Houston, TX)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I worry about the cost of understanding different local laws.
- If found non-compliant, I could face penalties that would ruin my business.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 7 |
college student (Miami, FL)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's scary to think local laws can affect DACA protections.
- I want to feel secure while finishing my education.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
nurse (Kansas City, MO)
Age: 52 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm concerned about the stress this adds to my immigrant patients.
- Enforcement changes could impact community health overall.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
delivery driver (Chicago, IL)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think the law will improve job opportunities for citizens.
- Local enforcement makes our communities safer.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
local government officer (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 30 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Balancing state and federal laws will strain local resources.
- I worry this will harm community trust in local authorities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
software engineer (Seattle, WA)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Decentralizing immigration enforcement is a negative change.
- This policy could harm our diverse tech community.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
restaurant worker (New York, NY)
Age: 26 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I could lose my job if the restaurant gets fined.
- This makes it tougher to feel settled in the city.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 7 |
retired teacher (El Paso, TX)
Age: 63 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm worried about how enforcement affects families like mine.
- We take care of our own, but these laws add undue stress.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
college student (Jackson, MS)
Age: 22 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could provide more job opportunities in law enforcement.
- I see potential benefits for local security enhancements.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $750000000 (Low: $500000000, High: $1000000000)
Year 2: $750000000 (Low: $500000000, High: $1000000000)
Year 3: $750000000 (Low: $500000000, High: $1000000000)
Year 5: $750000000 (Low: $500000000, High: $1000000000)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- State and local capacity to enforce complex immigration laws varies widely.
- The potential need for comprehensive training programs for local officers in immigration law.
- Likely legal challenges and civil liberties concerns.
- Economic impact due to changes in the labor force and immigration patterns.