Immigration Status Uncertain

The U.S. Supreme Court's validation of an Arizona law punishing businesses for hiring illegal immigrants raises the troubling prospect of a patchwork of state-level stabs at a federal responsibility.

Of equal importance with what the ruling may do is what it did not do.

While it affirmed an appeals court on the employer issue, it did not deal with the effects of Arizona's law on individuals who may find themselves caught up in crackdowns on illegal residency. That aspect of the law has been blocked by a federal appeals court and almost certainly is bound for a Supreme Court test.

Meanwhile, Indiana is entangled in litigation of its own, a fix it invited when it followed Arizona's example against the advice of legal experts including Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller.

Now, ironically enough, Zoeller has the duty of defending the statute he joined business, civic, health-care and religious leaders in opposing.

The federal lawsuit filed May 25 by the ACLU of Indiana does not deal with business sanctions, which are part of the Indiana law set to take effect in July. It focuses on elements in the law that it says could get people arrested without being here illegally or behaving criminally.

Among other specifics, the lawsuit says thousands of people who've been using IDs issued by the Mexican consulate could be falsely detained because the law makes such use a civil infraction.

As the ACLU's Ken Falk says, this amounts to "making foreign policy" without addressing domestic illegality.

It is unclear how that provision, among others, will play out on the street. Therein, for many legal residents and visitors who look or sound "foreign," lies the problem. Creating a climate of confusion and unwelcome would be a high price to pay for curbing illegal entry even if it worked. Yet there is no reason to believe the state would succeed where the federal government has failed. Indeed, the feds would retain final say for the future of any illegal immigrant who was detained.

Frustration with Washington prompted the General Assembly to pass its own law, as Zoeller pointed out in explaining his intention to defend it. He added, though: "I too have encouraged a federal approach to immigration matters." He did so while SB 590 was pending, in fact, challenging it on the grounds of enforceability.

Lifting that burden of enforceability from state and local police, who lack training and funding for the job, would be a favor on the court's part and an occasion to stop, study and shed light on a complex issue that has generated mostly heat.

REPRINTED FROM THE INDIANAPOLIS STAR

DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM