California lawmaker offers to revise "anti-Arizona" immigration bill

LOS ANGELES Mon Oct 1, 2012 10:26pm EDT

Related Topics

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - A California lawmaker offered on Monday to revise a proposed law to shield some illegal immigrants from federal status checks, a day after the state's Democratic governor vetoed the bill as "fatally flawed."

The bill as written would have barred local authorities from honoring federal detention requests on illegal immigrants, which may lead to deportation, unless those individuals were charged or convicted of a serious or violent felony.

Supporters of the measure said it would have served as a counterpoint for what they say is racial profiling inherent in an Arizona law that cracks down on illegal immigration that was allowed to stand by the U.S. Supreme Court earlier this summer.

But in his veto message, California Governor Jerry Brown said that, while he supports comprehensive immigration reform, the bill was "fatally flawed" because it could exempt individuals who had committed crimes such as child abuse, drug trafficking and selling weapons.

Democratic Assembly member Tom Ammiano, in a phone call with reporters on Monday, said he would be willing to revisit the list of crimes that could exempt some illegal immigrants from checks and plans to reintroduce similar legislation as early as January.

"Obviously we have it in our power to fix it," he said.

"Governors come and go, but this issue is more than a political issue. It is a movement... We're going to have success in this issue," he added.

While some Latino leaders have roundly criticized Brown for vetoing the bill, one political analyst said the fallout from Brown's decision was unlikely to lead to Democrats in California losing significant ground to Republicans with Latino voters.

Brown credited undocumented immigrants with playing a "major role in California's economy" in his veto message and said he believed the "significant flaws" in the bill could be fixed and the legislation brought back to him.

A representative for Brown did not return a call seeking comment on Monday.

The California legislation stems from unease among immigrant rights groups with an information-sharing program between federal and local law enforcement.

Had the bill been signed into law, California would have taken a stance in opposition not only to the legislation in Arizona but also similar bills in Alabama, Georgia, Indiana and South Carolina that have adopted stricter laws on immigration.

In a landmark case, the U.S. Supreme Court in June upheld Arizona's provision on immigration status checks by police. But it also struck down rules in the state's bill that would, among other things, ban illegal immigrants from soliciting work in public places.

(Reporting by Alex Dobuzinskis; Editing by Cynthia Johnston and Lisa Shumaker)

(This story has been corrected to add Brown's first name and title in fourth paragraph)

FILED UNDER:
We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (2)
coloww wrote:
Hey illegals. If open boarders, sanctuary state, California governor Brown isn’t inviting enough for you. Go back home! Our state and our country is overpopulated!

Oct 01, 2012 10:03pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
OneOfTheSheep wrote:
Democratic Assembly member Tom Ammiano says “Governors come and go, but this issue is more than a political issue. It is a movement… We’re going to have success in this issue…”. He may be right.

California is already well on the way to become “Mexifornia”, and an ever increasing number of business and the middle class are selling out and relocating before it’s past the tipping point where one can’t sell and can’t move because they can’t sell. Oregon, Washington, Arizona and Texas have been reaping these “refugees with money” at a much higher rate than other states.

I was there for twenty-five years, loved it. Saw the “handwriting/graffitti on the wall”, sold my home and business “at the top” in 1988, invested the proceeds elsewhere, doing just fine.

Hasta la vista, Baby!

Oct 01, 2012 12:08am EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.