FAQ on Georgia HB 87: Anti-Illegal Immigration Legislation

Since its introduction in the General Assembly, much has been written about HB 87--the "Illegal Immigration Reform and Enforcement Act of 2011."

I thought I would take this opportunity to address frequently asked questions and attempt to clear up some of the misunderstanding about the bill.  The bill was vetted through the Judiciary Non-Civil Committee, of which I am a member. 

The following questions/statements are actual ones that I have received.

I tried to simplify the description of the bill as much as I could, but some answers may need additional explanations.

I will try to provide answers and clarifications in the comments if someone has specific questions.  This will be the first part of a series of posts on this law.

The first topic will be the criminal law aspects of the bill. The second will be about employers. The third will be about everything else.  Feel free to comment and post questions, but please be respectful of the persons on the other side of the debate.

1.  Does HB 87 require me to carry my immigration papers around? Can they come into my business and check papers for my employees?

No.  Many media groups and opponents of the bill have painted HB87 as requiring non-U.S. citizens to carry their "papers" around.  First, unlike Arizona's SB 1070, HB 87 does not create a state crime for being out of status or being an illegal immigrant.  Nothing in HB 87 permits an officer to stop you in the first instance to investigate whether you are an illegal, or randomly ask for your "papers," or even stop you even if the officer suspects you may be an illegal alien.

This portion of AZ SB 1070 was blocked by a federal judge, and the GA General Assembly drafted around it. Thus, the police officer cannot stop you or arrest you absent reasonable suspicion/probable cause that you committed another crime. Nothing in HB 87 permits an officer to come onto your business property without a warrant and ask for "papers" from your employees. 

2.  Will HB 87 legalize racial profiling or increase it?

No.  In fact, HB 87 specifically states that race, color, and national origin cannot be used in implementing its provisions, except to the extent permitted under the U.S. and Georgia Constitutions. Opponents have said that the traffic stop provisions would lead to racial profiling. I believe this argument is without merit.

Again, I emphasize that HB 87 does not create a state crime for being an illegal immigrant.

Under HB 87, a police officer cannot stop you without probable cause that you committed another crime -- which may include a traffic offense.

By the way, once the officer finds probable cause that you committed certain traffic offenses, the officer has authority to arrest you (yes, even for a traffic law violation) or give you a summons to appear in court (a ticket).  Simply, the law does not give an additional ground to stop someone in the first instance. As such, nothing in HB 87 will "increase" or "legalize" racial profiling.

 3.   "A police officer will check the immigration status of all who are stopped for a traffic violation."

Incorrect. On any traffic stop, the officer will attempt to identify who you are by asking for your driver's license or other forms of Secure and Verifiable Identification (A long list of acceptable documentation, of which the most common form would be a driver's license and other identification documents -- a list will be provided by the AG).  If you forgot your license, you can provide your name and address so the officer can check the DDS database.  The police do this to make sure there are no warrants out for the person's arrest. Only if you cannot provide an identification and if the officer cannot verify who you are through the methods listed above, the officer is then authorized (not required) to use any reasonable method to identify the suspect's immigration status, which may include contacting U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

4.  "The law will lead to prosecution of church members who help illegal immigrants who apply for amnesty or other social programs."

This is incorrect. While HB87 does seek to punish anyone, while committing another crime,  who transports and/or harbors an illegal immigrants in Georgia, with the intent to further their presence in Georgia, the "transportation" and "harboring" provisions specifically exclude privately funded social services -- which includes churches and other non-profits providing such service to illegal immigrants.  Moreover, during the legislative process, it was made clear that the intent was to penalize "coyotes" or "snakeheads" -- those who smuggle or traffic in illegal immigrants.  I have very low concerns that the statute would be used to prosecute any bona fide providers of charitable services. If this occurs, I will personally introduce legislation to fix it, and will work to get those individuals attorneys to defend them in court.

This is the end of part one.  In the next series, I will examine the aspects of HB 87 which impacts employers.  An analysis of today's U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting will be included . . . stay tuned.