Boundaries of federal laws
An inherent authority is bestowed on the states, in order to protect the welfare of the public and activities such as the licensing of business firms and the issuance of a driver’s license fall within the scope of this authority. State and local governments can specify the requirements for such licensing; however, these specifications have to be within the boundaries of federal laws and the Constitution. As such licensing of businesses would be concomitant on the acceptance of that business to ensure that its employees’ status was legal and that it permits them to work in the US.
However, the states cannot compel businesses to employ only native – born Americans, because such a stipulation would tantamount to discrimination, which is unconstitutional. There is a strong support from the public for the state and local government initiatives. However, these measures are facing a great deal of criticism from voluntary groups and the media. For example, the American Civil Liberties Union or ACLU and the merits and demerits of delegated legislation Legal Defense and Education Fund or PRLDEF are legally challenging the activities of state and local bodies with respect to immigration legislation (The Need for State and Local Action).
These repercussions of the regulatory measures have two significant effects. First, they threaten illegal immigrants with severe punishment and second, they send a strong message to the Congress as well as the Administration that the people of America are not ready to maintain the status quo and that they should intervene and provide their support to contain the growing illegal immigration (The Need for State and Local Action).
The state and local governments that have to countenance illegal immigration are at a disadvantage, due to the fact that only the Federal Government is empowered to control it. The Supreme Court established a preemption analysis, which allows federal legislation, made in accordance with constitutional provisions, to supersede state and local laws. The main focus of such analysis is to ascertain whether Congress was desirous of setting aside local laws.
As such the judiciary accepts the presence of congressional intent to forestall local laws if such an intent is stated unambiguously, the local authorities attempt to control areas that had been specifically allocated by Congress to the Federal Government or if the local laws are in breach of the federal law (Montalto, 2007). There was a drastic increase in the inflow of immigrants to the US in the twentieth century. In the first twenty – five years of that century, their sustained totals were the highest.
Subsequently, the National Origins Quota Act was passed in 1924, the effects of the Great Depression and the curtailment of immigration during World War II, reduced the number of immigrants to ten percent of the previous number. Subsequent to World War II, the number of immigrants increased enormously and by the late 1980s and early 1990s, were almost the same as the number of immigrants during the first quarter of the century (Calavita, 1992). In 1986, the Immigration Reform and Control Act or IRCA was implemented and this allowed the legalization of the immigration of a number of illegal immigrants.
This made the number of immigrants in that period the highest in the history of immigration. The main characteristics of the post World War II immigration are that there has been a steady increase in the number of incidents of undocumented labor immigration; there has been an increase in the number of asylum seekers and refugees; the number of Hispanic and Asian immigrants has increased, while the number of European immigrants has decreased; and the criteria for admitting immigrants are skills and occupation and not nationality (Calavita, 1992).
In 1990 the Immigration Act was enacted, which rendered the act of entering the country on the basis of a non – immigrant visa very easy. The detractors of immigration for the purpose of seeking employment, opined that the entry of individuals into the country on non – immigrant visas was preferable to the permitting a much larger number of employment seeking immigrants into the nation (Calavita, 1992).
However, the states cannot compel businesses to employ only native – born Americans, because such a stipulation would tantamount to discrimination, which is unconstitutional. There is a strong support from the public for the state and local government initiatives. However, these measures are facing a great deal of criticism from voluntary groups and the media. For example, the American Civil Liberties Union or ACLU and the merits and demerits of delegated legislation Legal Defense and Education Fund or PRLDEF are legally challenging the activities of state and local bodies with respect to immigration legislation (The Need for State and Local Action).
These repercussions of the regulatory measures have two significant effects. First, they threaten illegal immigrants with severe punishment and second, they send a strong message to the Congress as well as the Administration that the people of America are not ready to maintain the status quo and that they should intervene and provide their support to contain the growing illegal immigration (The Need for State and Local Action).
The state and local governments that have to countenance illegal immigration are at a disadvantage, due to the fact that only the Federal Government is empowered to control it. The Supreme Court established a preemption analysis, which allows federal legislation, made in accordance with constitutional provisions, to supersede state and local laws. The main focus of such analysis is to ascertain whether Congress was desirous of setting aside local laws.
As such the judiciary accepts the presence of congressional intent to forestall local laws if such an intent is stated unambiguously, the local authorities attempt to control areas that had been specifically allocated by Congress to the Federal Government or if the local laws are in breach of the federal law (Montalto, 2007). There was a drastic increase in the inflow of immigrants to the US in the twentieth century. In the first twenty – five years of that century, their sustained totals were the highest.
Subsequently, the National Origins Quota Act was passed in 1924, the effects of the Great Depression and the curtailment of immigration during World War II, reduced the number of immigrants to ten percent of the previous number. Subsequent to World War II, the number of immigrants increased enormously and by the late 1980s and early 1990s, were almost the same as the number of immigrants during the first quarter of the century (Calavita, 1992). In 1986, the Immigration Reform and Control Act or IRCA was implemented and this allowed the legalization of the immigration of a number of illegal immigrants.
This made the number of immigrants in that period the highest in the history of immigration. The main characteristics of the post World War II immigration are that there has been a steady increase in the number of incidents of undocumented labor immigration; there has been an increase in the number of asylum seekers and refugees; the number of Hispanic and Asian immigrants has increased, while the number of European immigrants has decreased; and the criteria for admitting immigrants are skills and occupation and not nationality (Calavita, 1992).
In 1990 the Immigration Act was enacted, which rendered the act of entering the country on the basis of a non – immigrant visa very easy. The detractors of immigration for the purpose of seeking employment, opined that the entry of individuals into the country on non – immigrant visas was preferable to the permitting a much larger number of employment seeking immigrants into the nation (Calavita, 1992).
Comments
Post a Comment