1. WA won't join Secure Communities
2. CO policy summit debates cost
3. AZ employer law lacks teeth
4. 15 charged in TX protest
5. Illegal held after DUI crash

1.
Washington state won't join U.S. immigration program
By Lornet Turnbull
The Olympian (WA), November 30, 2010

Washington state has declined to sign an agreement that would allow the fingerprints of people booked into local jails to be checked against a national immigration database.

Immigration officials say the idea behind Secure Communities, a federal program rolling out across the country, is to identify, detain and eventually deport those subject to removal from the country, with a particular focus on those who have committed serious crimes.

But Secure Communities is controversial in some places where it operates, with immigrant advocates saying that it snags immigrants who’ve committed only minor offenses and could discourage people from reporting crimes to the police.

The program is in 788 jurisdictions across 34 states, including Oregon, Idaho and California, and in the past two years has led to the expulsion of some 46,800 individuals from the country.

The Department of Homeland Security, which runs Secure Communities through its Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) division, said it will be in every jail nationwide by 2013.

Over the last year, ICE has been trying to reach agreements with the agency in each state that serves as that state’s clearinghouse for fingerprint data. Any agreement with that agency would cover all local jurisdictions in the state.

In Washington, that agency is the State Patrol, which has chosen not to sign the agreement to activate Secure Communities here.

“We are a state law-enforcement agency, and we don’t want to go down the road of being an immigration agency,” Patrol spokesman Bob Calkins said. “The chief and the governor are of the same mind on this.”

A spokeswoman for Gov. Chris Gregoire said the governor has not yet made a “final determination.”

Calkins also said that while the State Patrol hasn’t signed the agreement, it won’t prevent local jurisdictions from doing so.

Ira Mehlman, spokesman for the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), which advocates for stronger immigration enforcement, said Washington’s position is wrongheaded political correctness.

Local authorities, he said, don’t refuse to cooperate with other federal law-enforcement agencies, such as the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives or the Drug Enforcement Administration.

“What possible justification can they have for not turning over this information that might be the one opportunity to catch someone who is really dangerous?” Mehlman asked. “They are just asking for some future tragedy.”
. . .
http://www.theolympian.com/2010/11/30/1457045/washington-state-wont-join...

********
********

2.
Colorado immigration tab decried at GOP forum
By Tim Hoover
The Denver Post, November 30, 2010

Illegal immigrants cost Colorado taxpayers as much as $1.5 billion a year, put downward pressure on wages and hurt employers that comply with the law.

That, at least, was the view presented Monday by advocates for stronger immigration laws at a summit held at the Capitol by the Republican Study Committee of Colorado, a group representing the most conservative GOP lawmakers.

The summit came as Sen.-elect Kent Lambert, R-Colorado Springs, has said he would sponsor a tough new immigration bill.

"It'll be, let's say, very similar to the Arizona 1070 law," Lambert said.

That law, which President Barack Obama's administration is fighting in court, would require Arizona police to question the immigration status of those they suspect are in the country illegally, require that immigrants carry registration papers, ban illegal immigrants from looking for work in public places and allow warrantless arrests for crimes that could result in deportation.

A federal judge has put those provisions on hold while a legal challenge is decided.

Such a law could face tough sledding in Colorado, where Republicans next year will control the House while Democrats will control the Senate and the governor's office.

Secure Communities program

Democrats and immigration-rights groups called Monday's gathering "extremist" and said an Arizona-style immigration law is not what Colorado needs.

"I am open to thoughtful, cost-effective proposals that reflect the values of our citizens," said House Minority Leader Sal Pace, D-Pueblo, "but foisting a one-size-fits-all law, such as Arizona's 1070, onto our unique state isn't the thoughtful answer Coloradans deserve."

Gov.-elect John Hickenlooper, the Democratic mayor of Denver, has expressed concerns about such a law.

"Arizona's law is troubling, but I am not surprised states are trying to address immigration policy because Congress hasn't," Hickenlooper said previously. "People throughout the country are justified in feeling angry over the failure of the federal government to deal with this issue."

Republicans also have called on outgoing Democratic Gov. Bill Ritter to sign on to the federal Secure Communities program. Under the system, the fingerprints of those booked into jail are automatically matched against a database of prints maintained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, identifying those who have been detained or deported before or who have had other contact with immigration authorities.

Ritter has said he wants to sign on to the program but only if ICE tailors an agreement for Colorado that addresses concerns about civil liberties. So far, such an agreement has not been signed.
. . .
http://www.denverpost.com/legislature/ci_16738523

********
********

3.
Arizona employer law nets immigrants, not companies
By Daniel C. Vock
Stateline, November 30, 2010

The video footage on the Phoenix morning news one Monday in mid-November showed dozens of heavily armed sheriff’s deputies breaking in on a business to round up and haul off illegal immigrants. The target of the morning raid was a landscaping company, but this was the 40th time in the past two years that the Maricopa County sheriff had raided a workplace. Among those previously targeted were McDonald’s franchises, a military contractor, sellers of printer cartridges, a meat packing plant, specialty metalworkers and trash collectors.

Like the other raids, the move on Nunez Creative Landscaping was a show of force that played well in front of TV cameras. Dozens of deputies stormed the premises. Suspects were handcuffed and led away. A news helicopter hovered overhead. Later, Joe Arpaio, the controversial lawman who brands himself as “America’s toughest sheriff,” held a press conference on the scene in time to make the early morning shows. Arpaio said half of the company’s 52 employees were suspected of being in the country illegally. His officers nabbed 17 of them that Monday and have taken away nearly 500 from various businesses since the workplace raids began.

The raid had another familiar aspect: The company’s owners were not targets, even though Arizona has the country’s toughest law against employers who hire illegal immigrants. The sheriff said his officers did not have enough evidence to go after the owners. Arpaio defended the raid when asked about it by a local reporter. “If we don’t get the employer,” he said, “we’re sure going to continue to get the employees that are here illegally using false identification.”

In fact, despite the dozens of raids, only two companies have ever been forced to close their doors under Arizona’s three-year-old employee verification law. The punishments in those cases were trivial: A Subway sandwich shop agreed to close on Easter and Thanksgiving, and a water park agreed to a 10-day suspension, but only after it already had gone out of business.

The Legal Arizona Workers Act may be tough, but even its supporters say it has been a disappointment. It faces plenty of opposition here in Arizona, especially among business owners and civil rights advocates.

The U.S. Supreme Court will hear a case next month to decide whether the Arizona law is legal, which could decide the fate of other state immigration laws, including Senate Bill 1070, the Arizona law passed this spring to give police more power to crack down on illegal immigration. (See sidebar for more on the Supreme Court case.)

But just as important a question still lingers over Arizona’s employee verification law: Is it even effective?

New checks required

THE SUPREME COURT CASE

The U.S. Supreme Court case to decide whether Arizona’s employee verification law is valid could have far-reaching consequences.

Depending on how the court rules, it could curtail state efforts to deal with the immigration issue — including the controversial law Arizona passed this spring to give police more power to enforce immigration laws. On the other hand, the decision could give the green light to states to try more innovative approaches. Or the court may rule narrowly and leave bigger issues for another day.

The crux of the case — Chamber of Commerce of the United States v. Whiting — is whether Arizona overstepped the authority given to states by Congress on enforcing immigration laws in the workplace.

A 1986 federal immigration law prevents states from “imposing civil or criminal sanctions (other than through licensing and similar laws)” on companies that hire or recruit unauthorized immigrants. The question is whether the Arizona law fits within the exceptions for “licensing and similar laws.”

The Arizona law is written to fit within the exception. Rather than impose fines or jail time, it includes punishments of either suspending or revoking a company’s business license.
. . .
http://stateline.org/live/details/story?contentId=531664

********
********

4.
15 charged over immigration protest in San Antonio
The Associated Press, November 30, 2010

Fifteen protesters face criminal trespass charges after an immigration demonstration at the San Antonio office of U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison.

Those arrested Monday night support the proposed Dream Act. The measure would provide a path to legal status for children of illegal immigrants who either go to college or join the military.

The protesters, some who had been present since Monday morning, included college students wearing graduation caps.

Hutchison on Monday was en route to Washington following the Thanksgiving weekend holiday.
. . .
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/tx/7316982.html

********
********

5.
Manslaughter suspect ordered held without bond
By Bill McKelway
The Richmond Times Dispatch (VA), November 30, 2010

An illegal immigrant charged with manslaughter in connection with a weekend crash in Ashland was ordered held without bond after a hearing this morning in Hanover General District Court.

Feliciano Aguas-Suarez spoke in Spanish through an interpreter in a video appearance from the Pamunkey Regional Jail. A lawyer was appointed for Aguas-Suarez after he said he could not afford counsel.

Hanover County Commonwealth's Attorney Trip Chalkley, in arguing that no bond be set, told General District Judge Peter L. Trible that Aguas-Suarez, 29, has used at least two other aliases and is wanted in Caroline County and Prince George's County, Md., for failure to appear on various driving-related offenses.
. . .
http://www2.timesdispatch.com/news/2010/nov/30/2/hano30-ar-683845/