DES MOINES, Iowa (CN) — The U.S. Justice Department and civil and immigrant rights groups individually sued Iowa in federal court on Thursday, accusing the state of unconstitutionally encroaching on federal authority with its recently passed anti-immigration law.
Senate File 2340, passed in March and signed by Republican Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds on April 10, makes it illegal under state law for noncitizens to reenter this country after having previously been removed or excluded.
Under the law, violators could face deportation and up to 10 years in prison. This state law entirely bypasses the federal government, which is typically responsible for immigration and border enforcement.
“It is impossible to overstate how terrible this law is,” Rita Bettis Austen, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Iowa, said at a news conference Thursday. She said immigration in the United States is regulated by “one federal immigration law — not 50 separate immigration systems.”
The civil rights groups' lawsuit challenging the law was filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa by the American Immigration Council, ACLU-Iowa and the national ACLU.
Among the defendants in that case are Republican Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird, Democratic Polk County Attorney Kimberly Graham, and Republican Clayton County Attorney Zach Herrmann — all state officials charged with enforcing the law. The national ACLU is suing on behalf of the Iowa Migrant Movement for Justice, as well as the immigrants that the organization represents.
The Justice Department suit, which names as defendants Governor Reynolds and other state officials, was also filed in federal court in Des Moines.
The law is set to go into effect on July 1. As early as Friday, the civil rights plaintiffs will file a motion seeking a preliminary injunction blocking enforcement of the law, Bettis Austen said.
In both complaints, the plaintiffs argue the federal government has exclusive power to regulate immigration. They cite the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2012 decision in Arizona v. United States.
The Justice Department claims Iowa’s SF 2340 is preempted by federal law and thus violates the supremacy clause of the U. S. Constitution and the dormant foreign commerce clause, which limits the power of the states to regulate the international movement of persons.
The federal government seeks a declaration invalidating Iowa’s law, and an order enjoining its enforcement.
Congress has already specified which noncitizens may be denied admission to the United States, including those who have previously been removed. It is not a crime for a person to reenter the United States if that person has a visa or other valid documentation, the civil rights plaintiffs argue in their complaint.
"Under SF 2340, even if a person now has lawful immigration status, they could be arrested and deported if they were previously deported or removed and reentered the country,” said Kate Melloy Goettel, legal director at the American Immigration Council and an attorney for the plaintiffs. “It's a law that makes absolutely no sense and is clearly unconstitutional."
In a statement of her own on Thursday, Iowa AG Bird laid the blame for immigration woes on Democratic President Joe Biden.
“When Biden fails to do his job and secure our border, states have to take matters into their own hands,” Bird said. “Iowa’s law is not unique; it simply enforces immigration laws while Biden refuses to. Iowa stands ready to defend our immigration law that keeps Iowa communities safe.”
Governor Reynolds likewise accused Biden of inaction in a statement on Thursday. “As governor, I have a responsibility to protect the citizens of Iowa,” she stated. “Since President Biden refuses to enforce our nation’s immigration laws — threatening the safety of our citizens — Iowa will step in.”
Nonetheless, some law-enforcement officials in the state fear the law could have the effect of making their communities less safe.
"This law undermines local law enforcement's ability to work with their communities and will actually diminish public safety, not improve it,” Michael Tupper, Marshalltown police chief, was quoted as saying in a news release from ACLU-Iowa.
“It will create fear in our community that will make people reluctant to talk to police and to report crimes," Tupper added. "The law provides for no additional funding to local and state governments who are now directed by the state law to arrest, prosecute, deport, or incarcerate people."
Des Moines Police Dana Wingert said in a statement released earlier that individuals’ immigration status is checked when they are booked at the jail.
Still, the work of confirming a person's immigration status falls to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Wingert stated. "I'm not interested, nor are we equipped, funded or staffed to take on additional responsibilities that historically have never been a function of local law enforcement."
Iowa’s law was modeled on a SB 4, a Texas state law signed this year by Republican Governor Greg Abbott.
That law — which makes it a crime to enter the state outside of a legal port of entry — has also been challenged. The New Orleans-based Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in March kept in place a lower court’s injunction barring enforcement while litigation proceeds.
Follow @@roxalaird16
Subscribe to Closing Arguments
Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.
Additional Reads
-
-
Ambulance too late May 17, 2024
