Panel begins dissection of new immigration law

Lawmakers were dumbfounded Thursday to learn from U.S. Attorney Brett Tolman that mere illegal presence isn't seen as a prosecutable crime in Utah.

"Once they come into an interior state, they are legal?" asked an incredulous Sen. Bill Hickman, R-St. George.

Tolman replied, "The status here is illegal." But, he said, illegal presence would have to be prosecuted in the state where an individual crossed the border illegally.

"What is prosecuted very vigorously in this state is re-entry," Tolman said, referring to illegal immigrants who have been previously deported.

His office has prosecuted more than 1,000 such cases. And, he said, illegal immigration is a component of 25 percent of cases his office investigates, ranging from gang activity to identity theft.

The discussion on criminal prosecutions was part of a broad-reaching discussion at the first meeting of the Legislature's Immigration Interim Committee held Thursday in the state Capitol. The committee is commissioned with evaluating SB81, a comprehensive illegal immigration law Hickman sponsored, and making recommendations on areas of possible state action. SB81 is set to take effect in July 2009, creating barriers against undocumented immigrants obtaining jobs or public benefits.

Enforcement ideas brought up ranged from bringing an immigration detention center to Utah to bolstering the Attorney General Office's identity theft unit.

Lawmakers also got an update on what other states are doing from Ann Morse of the National Conference of State Legislatures. Committee members weren't shy about venting their frustrations over federal inaction on several facets of immigration.

"I am just amazed at the federal government's inability to do anything," said Sen. Scott Jenkins, R-Plain City, the committee's co-chairman.

Morse said in the absence of federal action, Arizona and Colorado are attempting to create their own "guest worker" programs because existing federal visa programs are seen as cumbersome by employers and employees.

Three other states are involved in litigation over immigration action, Morse said. They are Arizona and Oklahoma, which have passed get-tough measures, and Illinois, which passed a law preventing employers from using a federal employment verification program.

"There is anecdotal evidence showing people leaving the state, children not in school," Morse said of Oklahoma. But, she said, it's difficult to say how much of that is due to Oklahoma's law and how much is due to the economic climate. And it's also unclear as yet what the impacts of such laws are.

Morse pointed out that two economists have come to opposite conclusions about Arizona's immigration law. One contends it's helping the state, the other that it's hurting.