Texas could become the next battleground for immigration.
In a state that has seen bills that would have made English the official language and required presidential candidates to prove their citizenship, lawmakers are eager to get to work during their next regular session in January and propose new immigration-related bills -- especially because the Supreme Court upheld a key piece of Arizona's immigration law Monday.Several state lawmakers are expected to revive the push for a bill similar to Arizona's "show me your papers" law, even though justices said in the Arizona ruling that officers couldn't arrest people on suspicion of immigration crimes. Last year's efforts to pass such a bill in Austin failed."The 'stop and ask' measure is fair game in the next session," said Bill Miller, an Austin-based political consultant who works with both Republicans and Democrats. "It absolutely will be proposed in Texas."Gov. Rick Perry called the ruling a victory but wasn't satisfied.It "is one step forward and two steps back -- simply not good enough," he said. "The people of Arizona took action consistent with federal law and in direct response to the failure of this administration to secure our nation's borders. The absence of federal action on immigration enforcement directly spoils the integrity of our nation's laws."Immigration has long been a heated issue in Texas -- prompting marches from residents, ordinances from some cities and bills from state lawmakers.This month, the Republican Party of Texas weighed in, dumping a hard-line approach to immigration and replacing it with the "Texas Solution," a plan to create a temporary-worker program that requires participants to pay fees, pass a criminal background check and waive rights for public financial help."The biggest step that Texas can take to secure our borders is to help remove President Obama from office this November," said Chris Elam, deputy executive director for the state GOP. "He has failed to live up to his promises on any sort of enforcement over our borders and our immigration laws."American Civil Liberties Union officials said the court's move to uphold the "show me your papers" provision "shows just how out of touch the court is with reality.""The tide has turned against laws like these," said Terri Burke, executive director of the ACLU of Texas.Texas legislationIn the Texas Legislature last year, more than 40 immigration-related bills were filed -- and died.But anything can happen next year, said state Rep. Leo Berman, R-Tyler, who has proposed bills making it a crime to be an illegal immigrant. But Berman, a former Arlington mayor pro tem, won't be there because he lost in the May primary."We've still got to deal with immigration," he said.State Rep. Debbie Riddle, R-Tomball, has also filed immigration bills, and her staff said she will review the court's ruling before deciding whether to refile similar measures next year.In 2010, she said she wouldn't be dissuaded by legal action because that would "only serve to stoke the raging signal fire alerting Washington, D.C., to the fact that there is finally no one left to blame but themselves" for border problems.Among immigration measures that died in Texas last year was a sanctuary cities bill, which would have prevented cities from enacting policies to stop peace officers from enforcing federal immigration laws. Perry gave the bill priority status."Undoubtedly, there will be those who will ... continue to push for 'sanctuary cities' legislation here in Texas," said state Rep. Lon Burnam, D-Fort Worth. "We will continue to fight against unconstitutional attempts to use the state's police powers to target members of our communities based on their race, ethnicity, or national origin."Congressional responseSeveral Texans in Congress said they were encouraged that the bulk of the Arizona law was rejected."When three out of four provisions of a state's law are struck down, it obviously can't be viewed as a victory for the state," said Rep. Charles Gonzalez, D-San Antonio. "Nor can an unconstitutional law be used a model for the nation, as Gov. Romney suggested. The fact that Romney has said that as president he would not even challenge Arizona's law, shows what a sad direction our country's immigration laws would go under his administration."But Rep. Joe Barton, R-Arlington, said he doesn't believe the ruling settles anything."I don't think that today's mixed ruling by the Supreme Court ends the debate; in fact it may only intensify the battle over immigration reform," he said.View from Farmers BranchFrustrated by a lack of congressional action, cities such as Farmers Branch created their own reforms.In 2006, then-Councilman Tim O'Hare drew national attention by proposing measures to make it harder for illegal immigrants to live and work in the city. Saying he was trying to bolster property values and the reputation of local schools, O'Hare, who eventually became mayor, proposed fines for landlords who rent to illegal immigrants and for businesses that hire them, as well as the designation of English as the city's official language. Many proposals were challenged in court.He has since left office but said Monday's ruling seems unfair."This shows why it is important for conservatives to vote in every election ... especially when it comes to the presidency ... so the president can appoint conservative Supreme Court justices," he said. "Otherwise, we will continue to see our freedoms eroded, our values eroded and a federal government in chaos."Anna M. Tinsley, 817-390-7610Twitter: @annatinsleyHave more to add? News tip? Tell us
