ACLU OF UTAH URGES GOVERNOR HERBERT TO VETO IMMIGRATION BILLS HB 497 AND HB 116

GOVERNOR SHOULD REJECT SUPPORTERS’ FALSE CLAIM THAT THE BILLS PRESENT COMPREHENSIVE APPROACH TO IMMIGRATION REFORM

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: (212) 549-2666; media@aclu.org

SALT LAKE CITY—The ACLU of Utah urges Governor Herbert to veto HB 497 (Immigration Enforcement) and HB 116 (Guest Worker Program), which recently passed the Utah State Legislature. These bills are contrary both to federal immigration laws and to the principles set forth in the Utah Compact.

“These bills have been pitched as a ‘kinder, gentler’ version of Arizona’s discriminatory law,” said ACLU of Utah Executive Director Karen McCreary. “In reality, however, HB 497, Utah’s proposed enforcement law, is no different in that it would encourage racial profiling and could actually hinder local law enforcement’s ability to enforce the laws of this state.” McCreary continued, “And, while HB 116 would supposedly allow undocumented workers to work in Utah under certain circumstances, it—like HB 497—directly contradicts federal immigration law and would likely be found unconstitutional if challenged.”

If Governor Herbert does not veto HB 497 and HB 116, Utah will be faced with at least the following legal and policy problems:

· Utahns would need to carry proof of lawful presence at all times or risk being subjected to a lengthy detention and investigation, which would result in an un-American, “show-me-your-papers” approach to law enforcement.

· Utahns who belong to racial or ethnic minority groups would, regardless of citizenship or lawful presence, be at an increased risk of being stopped, detained, or investigated based on impermissible, racially motivated criteria.

· Already scarce law enforcement resources would be spent on heavy-handed, immigration-motivated enforcement of low-level civil violations, such as traffic violations, which has the potential to erode trust between local law enforcement and immigrant communities, and could pose serious threats to public safety.

· Immigrants wishing to participate in a “guest worker” program would be lulled into a false sense of security by promised benefits that would extend only to Utah residents, while still being at constant risk of deportation by the federal government.

· Considerable taxpayer dollars would be spent defending laws that legislative analysts have said are “unconstitutional because they are preempted by federal law” (see Legislative Review Note to HB 116) and that, in the case of HB 497, are similar to laws already under constitutional challenge (and that have been largely suspended by the courts) in Arizona.

“Governor Herbert should absolutely veto these bills,” said ACLU of Utah Legislative & Policy Counsel Marina Lowe. “HB 497 would, as a practical matter, mandate that local law enforcement engage in law enforcement tactics that are counterproductive, costly, and unconstitutional, and HB 116 promises benefits that, frankly, the State of Utah cannot deliver.”

Added McCreary, “the supposed benefits of these bills are illusory, at best, but the negative consequences are significant and certain. We recognize that people are concerned about immigration, but this is not the answer. The Governor, as a responsible public servant, should veto both bills.”