Should Immigration Policy Be Decided By Individual States
Victor D. Chrispin Jr.
Immigration Policy: An Individual State Decision or a National Subject.
For many years in the United States, immigration policies have repeatedly ran across the desks of politicians intruding their minds with questions concerning the legalization, law policies, and other essential ideals concerning immigration. The decision of immigration is constantly wavering with half of politicians in favor of legalizing and half in favor of sending the immigrants back to where they came from. Civilians have wavered between the decision to stand for equality, and some just don’t care.
Should immigration policies be decided by individual states? Immigration is a federal issue, and should be decided accordingly. If the states interfere with immigration policies it would not only hurt the states, but hurt the nation. The states are primarily responsible for defining and prosecuting crimes in their state. Immigration law provides for both criminal punishments and …show more content…
A major case that shows the inconstancy in the state and why furthermore it should be a federal issue is the Arizona case. In the Article prepare by “Federal preemption of state immigration enforcement laws like Arizona’s S.B. 1070 makes perfect sense. The U.S. government should be able to enforce the immigration laws without interference from the states. The issue in this case was whether a state could supplement federal immigration law with its own laws. The answer was crystal clear: States are not welcome. According to “A state cannot, as Arizona sought to do, pursue its own state immigration enforcement policy. Such a patchwork approach to immigration law, with possibly 50 different policy variations, can allow the nation’s relationships with foreign countries to be held hostage to a rogue state or
Immigration Policy: An Individual State Decision or a National Subject.
For many years in the United States, immigration policies have repeatedly ran across the desks of politicians intruding their minds with questions concerning the legalization, law policies, and other essential ideals concerning immigration. The decision of immigration is constantly wavering with half of politicians in favor of legalizing and half in favor of sending the immigrants back to where they came from. Civilians have wavered between the decision to stand for equality, and some just don’t care.
Should immigration policies be decided by individual states? Immigration is a federal issue, and should be decided accordingly. If the states interfere with immigration policies it would not only hurt the states, but hurt the nation. The states are primarily responsible for defining and prosecuting crimes in their state. Immigration law provides for both criminal punishments and …show more content…
A major case that shows the inconstancy in the state and why furthermore it should be a federal issue is the Arizona case. In the Article prepare by “Federal preemption of state immigration enforcement laws like Arizona’s S.B. 1070 makes perfect sense. The U.S. government should be able to enforce the immigration laws without interference from the states. The issue in this case was whether a state could supplement federal immigration law with its own laws. The answer was crystal clear: States are not welcome. According to “A state cannot, as Arizona sought to do, pursue its own state immigration enforcement policy. Such a patchwork approach to immigration law, with possibly 50 different policy variations, can allow the nation’s relationships with foreign countries to be held hostage to a rogue state or