Immigrants selling food, flowers and other merchandise along the sidewalks of California will have new privacy protections intended to keep their identities secret from federal immigration agents.
The measure, signed into law this past week by Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom, comes on the heels of other recently enacted state laws meant to shield students in schools and patients at health care facilities from the reach of President Donald Trump's immigration
enforcement actions.
Democratic-led states are adding laws resisting Trump even as he intensifies his deportation campaign by seeking to deploy National Guard troops to Democratic-led cities to reinforce U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers who are arresting people suspected of being in the U.S. illegally.
By contrast, some Republican-led states are requiring local law enforcement agencies to cooperate with ICE agents.
“The actions of the states really reflect the polarization of the country on this issue,” said Jessica Vaughan, director of policy studies at the Center for Immigration Studies, which supports immigration restrictions. “We have seen some states move to cooperate to the greatest extent that they possibly can” with Trump’s administration and others “doing what they can to try to thwart immigration enforcement in their state.”
Across the U.S, state lawmakers this year have passed more than 100 bills relating to immigration, according to an Associated Press analysis aided by the bill tracking software Plural. The measures are divided almost evenly between those providing and denying protections to immigrants.
Immigrants comprise a significant portion of California's urban sidewalk vendors. Some have been swept up in immigration enforcement actions, in part, because their outdoor work in public places makes them easier targets than people behind closed doors.
California's street vendors typically need permits from cities or counties. The new law prohibits local governments from inquiring about vendors' immigration status, requiring fingerprinting or disclosing personal information — name, address, birth date, social media identifiers and telephone, driver's license and Social Security numbers, among other things — without a judicial subpoena.
The law, which will take effect Jan. 1, was prompted by concerns that vendor databases kept by local governments could be accessed by federal immigration agents to target people for detention and deportation.
“We’re talking about really security –- security for businesses, security for human beings, security for people who have gone through so much," said Sergio Jimenez, a street vending organizer with the nonprofit Community Power Collective in Los Angeles.
Additional laws recently signed by Newsom add immigration status to a list of protected medical information and prohibit schools from granting access to immigration enforcement officials without a court warrant. Another new California law directs schools and higher education institutions to immediately notify staff and students or parents when immigration officials are on campus.
Upon taking office, Trump reversed a policy restricting federal immigration agents from arresting people at sensitive locations such as schools, churches and hospitals. Like California, other Democratic-led states responded with laws attempting to create safe places for immigrants.
A Maryland law enacted earlier this year requires public schools, libraries and health care facilities to restrict access for immigration enforcement officials unless presented with a court warrant. Nevada's Republican governor vetoed a similar measure for schools that had been passed by the Democratic-led Legislature.
Meanwhile, a new Colorado law allows civil penalties of up to $50,000 for public child care centers, schools, colleges, health care facilities and libraries that collect information about people’s immigration status, with some exceptions. New laws in Rhode Island prohibit health care providers and landlords from inquiring about people's immigration status. Oregon also enacted a similar law for landlords.
By contrast, Republican-led states have passed numerous laws intended to bolster Trump’s immigration policies.
New laws in Texas, Florida and Arkansas require sheriffs who run jails to enter into federal agreements for their officers to be trained to help U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. State and local participation in the federal 287(g) immigration enforcement program — named after the section of law that created it — has exploded from 135 agreements in 21 states before Trump took office in January to more than 1,000 agreements presently in place in 40 states.
But some Democratic-led states have refused to take part. A new Delaware law prohibits participation in the program, similar to statutes already in place in California and Illinois. Democratic-led Vermont also tightened its restrictions on participating in federal immigration enforcement programs, repealing an exemption that had allow it during emergencies.
A Connecticut law that took effect in October allows people to sue local governments that cooperate with federal immigration authorities in violation of the state’s “Trust Act.”
In Washington, new state laws allow workers to take paid leave to attend immigration proceedings for themselves or family members and prohibit employers from using immigration status to coerce their employees.
But some Republican-led states have enacted laws limiting benefits for people in the country illegally.
A new Idaho law prohibits immigrants without legal status from receiving some publicly funded health benefits, including vaccinations, crisis counseling and prenatal and postnatal care for women. A new Louisiana law requires applicants for public benefits to be screened for legal immigration status and, if lacking it, reported to federal immigration authorities
Several Republican-led states — including Florida, Louisiana, New Hampshire, Tennessee and Wyoming — have adopted laws invalidating certain driver’s licenses issued to immigrants in the U.S. illegally.
Entering into this year, nearly half the states provided in-state tuition to public colleges and universities for residents living in the U.S. illegally. But that number has dwindled since Trump took office and the U.S. Department of Justice began suing states. The federal lawsuits assert states are violating the Constitution by providing in-state tuition for people without legal status while not offering the same benefit to out-of-state U.S. citizens.
Florida repealed its decade-old law allowing in-state tuition for students lacking legal status, effective July 1. Republican-led Texas and Oklahoma both ended similar tuition policies after getting sued by the Justice Department. Kentucky, which has a Democratic governor, also has taken steps to halt its policy after getting sued.
California lawmakers attempted to enhance tuition benefits for immigrants with a first-of-its kind measure allowing community college students who get deported or voluntarily leave the U.S. to continue receiving in-state tuition while taking online courses from afar. But Newsom vetoed the measure earlier this month, citing “significant constitutional concerns” that the tuition break was offered only to students who left the country and not also to residents of other U.S. states.
A bill passed by New Mexico's Democratic-led Legislature this year would have expanded in-state tuition breaks to immigrants who earned income in New Mexico during the previous two years or who attended at least two semesters of adult education courses. But Democratic Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham let the bill die without her signature.
