Can States Regulate Immigration? Part 11
How Opposition to Arizona SB 1070 May Be Harming Unlawful Aliens
2 May 2010 in Regulatory Economics, Regulatory Policy, Legislation
We have reviewed Arizona's new immigration law (SB 1070) and posted
an analysis
of its major provisions. The Arizona House subsequently passed a
revision, and we analyzed
that. Meanwhile, opponents have reacted stridently,
calling the state of Arizona:
- A police state (Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.); Rep. Jared Polis (D-Colo.); The Nation, via National Public Radio; New York Times Supreme Court correspondent Linda Greenhouse; American Civil Liberties Union; LaRaza President and CEO Janet Murguia) in which Americans would have to "present their papers" (Rep. Connie Mack (R-Fla.), Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.))
- Reminiscent of Nazi Germany (Cardinal Roger Mahoney, Al Sharpton, Mack, Polis), the Soviet Union (Greenhouse, Mahoney), the Jim Crow South (Sharpton, Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Tex.), rapper Rass Kass, demonstrators in Newport News VA), or apartheid South Africa (Rep. Yvette Clarke (D-N.Y.), Sharpton)
- Racist (Polis, Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.), Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson)
As our previous posts here and here make clear, these characterization are not based on the text of the law, which makes it a state crime to violate federal immigration law. Ironically, the use of extreme language by opponents of the law may have the unintended effect of better achieving the law's objectives than the law itself.
To see how this could happen, it is helpful to review some statistical estimates published by the Census Bureau:
- Arizona's 2009 population: 6,595,778.
- In 2000:
- percentage of the Arizona population that was foreign born: 12.8%
- percentage of the Arizona population using a language other than English at home: 25.9%
- In 2006-08 (confidence intervals are 90th percentiles):
- percentage of the Arizona population that was foreign born: 14.9% ± 0.2%
- percentage of foreign-born population who are not US citizens: 69.9% ± 0.7%
- percentage of foreign-born population from Latin America: 71/2% ± 0.5%
- percentage of the Arizona population 5+ using a language other than English at home: 27.9% ± 0.2%
- percentage of non-English speaking population 5+ using Spanish at home: 21.7% ± 0.2%
- proportion using Spanish: 21.7%/27.9% = 77.8%
- percentage of non-English speaking population 5+ using Spanish at home: 21.7% ± 0.2%
- proportion using Spanish who speak English less than "very well": 12.1%/27.9% = 43.3%
- percentage of the Arizona population that was foreign born: 14.9% ± 0.2%
Unlawful aliens are most likely to populate the categories in yellow. This means they are likely to give the greatest credibility to what opponents of the law say about it. After all, opponents of the law also tend to be opponents of federal enforcement of federal immigration law and advocates of full legalization. When opponents describe the law in extreme terms, unlawful aliens are likely to believe they are characterizing it accurately. They also are likely to discount the assurances of the law's supporters (whose motives they probably distrust) and the text of the law (which many cannot read because of limited English proficiency). Thus, when opponents describe the law in draconian terms, their descriptions could be self-fulfilling. Extreme rhetoric quite reasonably should make unlawful aliens in Arizona much more fearful of deportation, unlike the unlawful aliens protesting the law in other states who appear to have no qualms about having their identities revealed by reporters.
In short, opponents' use of extreme rhetoric to criticize the law should make unlawful aliens more likely to choose to leave Arizona, and perhaps even self-deport if they do not have sufficient work. Further reinforcing this irony, opponents of the law say that encouraging self-deportation is the objective of the law's supporters.
A POSTSCRIPT
To obtain the quotes at the top of this post, we reviewed a cross-section of major English language media using Factiva. We did not search Spanish-language sources, which unlawful aliens are most likely to rely on as authoritative. A quick review of some Spanish-language sources reveals similar rhetoric.
How Spanish-language media report on the law is crucial for predicting its likely effect, something that English-speaking commentators have not publicly recognized.
It is widely acknowledged by both the law's supporters and opponents that Arizona's circumstances are extreme, if not unique. Nonetheless, Vida Nueva quotes San Francisco police chief George Gascon predicting that other states will adopt the Arizona model:
"Sin lugar a duda esta propuesta de ley en Arizona tendrá en efecto en todo el país," puntualizó el jefe de policía de San Francisco.
The basis for this prediction isn't clear, and officials and commentators in other states with large unlawful alien populations (e.g., South Carolina, Texas) disagree. San Francisco is a declared "sanctuary city," and the principal effect SB 1070 can have on it is to make the city a more attractive place for unlawful aliens to live. Those currently in Arizona can be assured that they will not be deported if they move there.
