Category Archives: Immigration

New DACA license bill would stop DOT ‘pink stripe’ design

A new bill introduced yesterday would require the state to issue licenses for people who qualify under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals initiative and prohibit the DOT from making them distinguishable from regular licenses. The department announced recently it would issue licenses that include a pink stripe and the words NO LAWFUL STATUS written in red and caps.

Short Title:        Allow Drivers Licenses for DACA Beneficiaries. (Public)
Sponsors: Representatives Luebke, Gill, Glazier, and McManus (Primary Sponsors).
Referred to:  

A BILL TO BE ENTITLED

AN ACT to clarify that beneficiaries of the federal deferred action for childhood arrivals initiative are eligible to obtain a drivers license in this state.

The General Assembly of North Carolina enacts:

SECTION 1. G.S. 20‑7(s) reads as rewritten:

“(s)       Notwithstanding the requirements of subsection (b1) of this section that an applicant present a valid social security number, the Division shall issue a drivers license of limited duration, under subsection (f) of this section, to an applicant applicant, including a beneficiary of the federal Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) initiative, present in the United States who holds valid documentation issued by, or under the authority of, the United States government that demonstrates the applicant’s legal presence of limited duration in the United States if the applicant presents that valid documentation and meets all other requirements for a license of limited duration. Notwithstanding the requirements of subsection (n) of this section addressing background colors and borders, a drivers license of limited duration issued under this section shall bear a distinguishing mark or other designation on the face of the license clearly denoting the limited duration of the license. However, a license of limited duration granted to a beneficiary of the federal DACA initiative shall not be distinguishable in any manner from other licenses issued pursuant to this subsection.

SECTION 2. This act is effective when it becomes law.

More via the Mercury

Carolina Mercury – Pink licenses were OK’d by McCrory

Bill filed to stop drivers licenses under DACA

After a long battle to win the right to drivers licenses under DACA – the federal Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals initiative, which allows for a more normal life for undocumented individuals brought here as children – a bill filed today would put a moratorium on issuing licenses until the General Assembly reviews the matter.

H 141 Main Page

Short Title:        DACA Beneficiaries/Drivers License Moratorium. (Public)
Sponsors: Representatives Brody, J. Bell, Lambeth, and Millis (Primary Sponsors).
Referred to:  

 

A BILL TO BE ENTITLED

AN ACT to ENABLE THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY TO FULLY INVESTIGATE AND DELIBERATE ON ALL AVAILABLE OPTIONS FOR PROTECTING THE INTERESTS OF THE STATE AND ITS CITIZENS WITH REGARD TO THE FEDERAL DEFERRED ACTION FOR CHILDHOOD ARRIVALS INITIATIVE.

Whereas, federal immigration laws are complicated, inconsistent, and confusing; and

Whereas, these problems have been exacerbated by the federal government’s failure to enforce existing laws and to protect the nation’s borders; and

Whereas, the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) initiative announced by the United States Secretary of Homeland Security on June 15, 2012, compounds the confusion in federal immigration law rather than diminishes it; and

Whereas, rather than working with the General Assembly to craft a careful and deliberate legislative response to the DACA initiative, the previous administration merely requested a North Carolina Attorney General’s opinion; and

Whereas, the Office of the Attorney General issued an opinion on January 17, 2013, that further complicates the application of the law in this State; and

Whereas, possession of a valid drivers license has traditionally been one of the main methods by which residents of this State demonstrate their eligibility to receive various benefits and entitlements and to exercise various fundamental rights; and

Whereas, granting drivers licenses to a whole new class of individuals may therefore have far reaching ramifications for numerous State programs, benefits, and rights; and

Whereas, the complexity of these issues requires a carefully crafted legislative response, undertaken only after thorough investigation and deliberation by the people’s elected representatives in the General Assembly; Now, therefore,

The General Assembly of North Carolina enacts:

SECTION 1. Notwithstanding G.S. 20‑7(b1) or (s) or any other provision of law, the Division of Motor Vehicles shall not issue a drivers license of any kind to an applicant whose lawful presence was derived through the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals initiative announced by the United States Secretary of Homeland Security on June 15, 2012.

SECTION 2. This act is effective when it becomes law and expires on June 15, 2013.

WRAL – Bill would put DACA licenses on hold

Immigration meeting canceled

The House select committee on the the State’s Role in Immigration, a group that was looking into the 287(g) program and what other states like Arizona and Alabama were doing, cancelled its meeting scheduled for today.

It’s hard not to look at the results from the November 6 election and the “evolution” of key national Republicans and see a lot of reasons to rethink the aggressive pursuit of laws intended to get people to self-deport. Immigration is one of those issues where the new legislature will be challenged to reverse course as a result of the election.

You can peruse the committee’s agendas and presentations and get an idea of where it was headed. A lot of consideration was given to an Alabama-styled bill, which aims to encourage “self-deportation,” which is a nice way of saying make life intolerable.

You may recall the ruckus at the committee’s meeting in February when the committee heard from the homebuilders and the state’s growers about what a tough law like Alabama’s might do. From the official minutes of the meeting:

Representative Cleveland was recognized and stated the idea that illegals being forced out of the State is going to cause economic hardship is overblown and it would be a benefit to the State to have the illegals gone. After a raid on a packing plant where several illegal workers were removed, the plant reopened two days later with American workers filling the jobs. Ms. Jacoby replied that she does not condone illegal immigration; however, states such as Georgia, Alabama and Arizona have found that driving these workers out of the state has been bad for industry. The states are caught between a rock and a hard place on what can be done to help these companies get legal immigrant workers.

Representative Cleveland was again recognized and asked what was the actual monetary number for the loss in agriculture and what is the real truth since nobody has an honest figure. If the numbers were true, the state of Georgia would be back peddling and they aren’t. Ms. Jacoby responded that NC is on the right path with E-Verify and time must be given to allow it work.

Representative Iler asked if the 25 employee number for HB 36 should be higher or lower. Ms. Jacoby answered that the number is a good balance. Other states such as Utah have a 14 employee threshold and Tennessee has a 10 employee threshold before E-Verify must be used.

Representative Iler asked if any solution in relation to a state issue ID have been proposed in other states. Ms. Jacoby stated she had not seen this in any state than for guest worker programs.

Representative Warren was recognized and asked about any potential programs that would transition people from the unemployment line or penal system to the fields. Ms. Jacoby responded that Georgia had tried this and the results were not promising. Workers were fleeing the fields around 3:00 in the afternoon and it was harder work than they want to do. Representative Warren was recognized for a follow up and stated that E-Verify does nothing to stop identity theft.

Representative Cleveland was recognized for a comment regarding a large drug bust in Rockingham County confiscating $600,000.00 and over 1,000 pounds of marijuana from two illegal aliens.

At this time, several members of the audience stood and made the statement that they were “illegal and unafraid”. These demonstrators were removed from the committee room and three arrested for disorderly conduct.
Chairman Iler stated that demonstrations and outbursts will not be tolerated by the committee.

Rep. George Cleveland, you may recall, is the representative who famously said there is no one in deep poverty in North Carolina.

SB 179 — Your papers, please

Here is the text of the bill introduced on Thursday that requires aliens to carry their registration papers with them at all times. This makes North Carolina the 18th state to consider Arizona-like legislation.
Other links:
Official bill tracking page
UNC study on 287(g) costs (pdf)

AN ACT to create the crime of willful failure to carry or complete an alien registration document.

The General Assembly of North Carolina enacts:

SECTION 1. Chapter 14 of the General Statutes is amended by adding a new Article to read:

“Article 62.

“Crimes Related to Immigration.

“§ 14‑465. Willful failure to complete or carry an alien registration document.

(a) Offense. — In addition to any violation of federal law, a person commits the offense of willful failure to complete or carry an alien registration document if the person is in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1304(e) or § 1306(a).

(b) Classification. — Willful failure to complete or carry an alien registration document is a Class 1 misdemeanor, except that the maximum fine is one hundred dollars ($100.00) and the maximum imprisonment is 20 days for a first offense and 30 days for subsequent offenses.

(c) Verification of Status. — In enforcing this section, a person’s immigration status may be determined by either of the following:

(1) A law enforcement officer who is authorized by the federal government to verify or ascertain a person’s immigration status.

(2) A federal agency pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1373(c).

(d) Cost of Confinement. — In addition to any other penalty prescribed by law, the court shall order a person convicted of the offense described in subsection (a) of this section to pay the costs of the offender’s confinement.

(e) Nondiscrimination. — Law enforcement officers and agencies shall not consider race, color, or national origin in the enforcement of this section.

(f) Exception. — This section does not apply to a person who maintains authorization from the federal government to remain in the United States.

(g) Admissibility of Records. — Any record that relates to the immigration status of a person is admissible in any court without further foundation or testimony from a custodian of records if the record is certified as authentic by the government agency that is responsible for maintaining the record.”

SECTION 2. This act becomes effective December 1, 2011, and applies to offenses committed on or after that date.

Stories:
- North Carolina following Az lead
- En español

Checkpoint monitoring and racial profiling

More on the racial profiling issue via this post from the Southern Coalition for Social Justice on BlueNC.

Over the past week the Southern Coalition for Social Justice has been ramping up its efforts to train checkpoint monitors, with public training sessions in Guilford Co, Alamance Co, and Durham, NC . Hundreds of community members, students, and immigrant’s rights allies have been trained in how to respond to police license checkpoints, in response to the growing number of checkpoints which lead to the deportation of thousands of undocumented immigrants which have devastated immigrant communities in the past few years.

Prevent Racial Profiling

Senate Bill 464 — prevent racial profiling — is going to get a review by the House Juvenile Justice Judiciary Committee this week. (Remember the incidents in Alamance? )
Here’s the text:

A BILL TO BE ENTITLED

AN ACT to amend the law requiring the collection of traffic law enforcement statistics in order to prevent racial profiling and to provide for the care of minor children when present at the arrest of certain adults.

The General Assembly of North Carolina enacts:

SECTION 1. G.S. 114‑10.01 reads as rewritten:

“§ 114‑10.01. Collection of traffic law enforcement statistics.

(a) In addition to the duties set forth in G.S. 114‑10, the Division of Criminal Statistics shall collect, correlate, and maintain the following information regarding traffic law enforcement by law enforcement officers:

(1) The number of drivers stopped for routine traffic enforcement by law enforcement officers, the officer making each stop, the date each stop was made, the agency of the officer making each stop, and whether or not a citation or warning was issued.

(2) Identifying characteristics of the drivers stopped, including the race or ethnicity, approximate age, and gender.

(3) The alleged traffic violation that led to the stop.

(4) Whether a search was instituted as a result of the stop.

(5) Whether the vehicle, personal effects, driver, or passenger or passengers were searched, and the race or ethnicity, approximate age, and gender of each person searched.

(6) Whether the search was conducted pursuant to consent, probable cause, or reasonable suspicion to suspect a crime, including the basis for the request for consent, or the circumstances establishing probable cause or reasonable suspicion.

(7) Whether any contraband was found and the type and amount of any such contraband.

(8) Whether any written citation or any oral or written warning was issued as a result of the stop.

(9) Whether an arrest was made as a result of either the stop or the search.

(10) Whether any property was seized, with a description of that property.

(11) Whether the officers making the stop encountered any physical resistance from the driver or passenger or passengers.

(12) Whether the officers making the stop engaged in the use of force against the driver, passenger, or passengers for any reason.

(13) Whether any injuries resulted from the stop.

(14) Whether the circumstances surrounding the stop were the subject of any investigation, and the results of that investigation.

(15) The geographic location of the stop; if the officer making the stop is a member of the State Highway Patrol, the location shall be the Highway Patrol District in which the stop was made; for all other law enforcement officers, the location shall be the city or county in which the stop was made.

(b) For purposes of this section, “law enforcement officer” means any of the following:

(1) All State law enforcement officers.

(2) Law enforcement officers employed by county sheriffs or county police departments.

(3) Law enforcement officers employed by police departments in municipalities with a population of 10,000 or more persons.

(4) Law enforcement officers employed by police departments in municipalities employing five or more full‑time sworn officers for every 1,000 in population, as calculated by the Division for the calendar year in which the stop was made.

(c) The information required by this section need not be collected in connection with impaired driving checks under G.S. 20‑16.3A or other types of roadblocks, vehicle checks, or checkpoints that are consistent with the laws of this State and with the State and federal constitutions, except when those stops result in a warning, search, seizure, arrest, or any of the other activity described in subdivisions (4) through (14) of subsection (a) of this section.

(d) The identity of the law enforcement officer making the stop required by subdivision (1) of subsection (a) of this section may be accomplished by assigning Each law enforcement officer making a stop covered by subdivision (1) of subsection (a) of this section shall be assigned an anonymous identification numbers to each officer in an number by the officer’s employing agency. The anonymous identifying number shall be public record and shall be reported to the Division to be correlated along with the data collected under subsection (a) of this section. The correlation between the identification numbers and the names of the officers shall not be a public record, and shall not be disclosed by the agency except when required by order of a court of competent jurisdiction to resolve a claim or defense properly before the court.

(d1) Any agency subject to the requirements of this section shall submit information collected under subsection (a) of this section to the Division within 30 days of the close of each month. Any agency that does not submit the information as required by this subsection shall be ineligible to apply for any law enforcement grants available by or through the State until the information which is reasonably available is submitted.

(e) The Division shall publish and distribute by December 1 of each year a list indicating the law enforcement officers that will be subject to the provisions of this section during the calendar year commencing on the following January 1.”

SECTION 2. G.S. 15A‑401 is amended by adding a new subsection to read:

“(g) Care of Minor Children. — When a law enforcement officer arrests an adult who is supervising minor children who are present at the time of the arrest, the minor children must be placed with a responsible adult approved by a parent or guardian of the minor children. If it is not possible to place the minor children with a responsible adult approved by a parent or guardian within a reasonable period of time, the law enforcement officer shall contact the county department of social services.”

SECTION 3. This act becomes effective January 1, 2010.

Bill of the Day: Battle over immigration and higher education

Conflicting approaches to immigration and higher education on the agenda for the legislature.
H362 instructs the community college and UNC systems not to implement any policies requiring people to list their immigration status when applying for school.
Several bills filed by GOP this year and in past sessions would require that along with making immigration status a deal breaker for prospective students.
As I’ve said many times, the status arguments don’t get to the heart of the issue, which is what to do about the gray area – the people who came here as a small child, the people who lived undocumeted for a while and are now legal, the people in mixed families and so on. That is why the feds have to step in on this.

Here’s the text of H362:

Short Title:        Access to Higher Education.

(Public)

Sponsors:

Representative Harrison.

Referred to:

A BILL TO BE ENTITLED

AN ACT to prevent the board of governors of the university of north carolina and the state board of community colleges from soliciting information regarding the immigration status of prospective students.

The General Assembly of North Carolina enacts:

SECTION 1. G.S. 15D‑5(a) reads as rewritten:

“(a)       The State Board of Community Colleges may adopt and execute such policies, regulations and standards concerning the establishment, administration, and operation of institutions as the State Board may deem necessary to insure the quality of educational programs, to promote the systematic meeting of educational needs of the State, and to provide for the equitable distribution of State and federal funds to the several institutions.

The State Board of Community Colleges shall establish standards and scales for salaries and allotments paid from funds administered by the State Board, and all employees of the institutions shall be exempt from the provisions of the State Personnel Act. The State Board shall have authority with respect to individual institutions: to approve sites, capital improvement projects, budgets; to approve the selection of the chief administrative officer; to establish and administer standards for professional personnel, curricula, admissions, and graduation; to regulate the awarding of degrees, diplomas, and certificates; to establish and regulate student tuition and fees within policies for tuition and fees established by the General Assembly; and to establish and regulate financial accounting procedures.

The State Board of Community Colleges shall require all community colleges to meet the faculty credential requirements of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools for all community college programs.

The State Board of Community Colleges shall not adopt any admissions requirement for any community college relating to a person’s immigration status, except as otherwise required by federal law. Nothing in this section prohibits a community college from requiring noncitizen students to pay out‑of‑state tuition.

SECTION 2. G.S. 115D‑20(4) reads as rewritten:

“(4)      To apply the standards and requirements for admission and graduation of students and other standards established by the State Board of Community Colleges. Provided, notwithstanding any law or administrative rule to the contrary, local administrative boards and local school boards may establish cooperative programs in the areas they serve to provide for college courses to be offered to qualified high school students with college credits to be awarded to those high school students upon the successful completion of the courses. Provided, further, that during the summer quarter, persons less than 16 years old may be permitted to take noncredit courses on a self‑supporting basis, subject to rules of the State Board of Community Colleges. A local administrative board shall not adopt any admissions requirement for any community college relating to a person’s immigration status, except as otherwise required by federal law. Nothing in this section prohibits a community college from requiring noncitizen students to pay out‑of‑state tuition.

SECTION 3. G.S. 116‑11 is amended by adding a new subdivision to read:

(8b) The Board of Governors shall not adopt any admissions requirement for any constituent institution in The University of North Carolina relating to a person’s immigration status, except as otherwise required by federal law. Nothing in this section prohibits the Board of Governors from requiring noncitizen students to pay out‑of‑state tuition.

SECTION 4. This act becomes effective October 1, 2009.