|
In June, myself and six other Iowa legislators toured the Mexico/U.S border for the first time. This section is a continuation from the July newsletter when I began to publish portions of my 10-part mini-series, Journey to the Border. Read about parts 1 through 4 in previous newsletters which can be here.
Part 5: “It’s a Federal Issue”
I am guilty of once believing that there was nothing the State of Iowa could do regarding immigrations policy because I have heard so many times, “it’s a federal issue.”
In one sense, this is true because the policy is set by the federal administration. We find the power granted to Congress in the U.S. Constitution:
Article I, Section 8, Clause 4:
[The Congress shall have Power...] To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization…
According to Constitution Annotated, Congress may “legislate terms and conditions by which a foreign-born national (alien) may become a U.S. citizen. Moreover, Congress’s power over naturalization is exclusive; states may not impose their own terms and conditions by which aliens may become U.S. citizens.”1
But more pertinent to this series, it has been determined by the U.S. Supreme Court that the Naturalization Clause above also permits Congress to “set rules for when aliens may enter or remain in the United States.”1
It’s these “rules when aliens may enter and remain” that we call federal immigration policy. We all know too well that the “rules” can potentially change every four years with each passing president. This creates the unfortunate and unpredictable situation in which the “rules” determine the ever changing trajectory of immigration in America. The agencies we spoke with while in Texas attribute the current “de facto border” to the changing of the “rules” in 2020.
Furthermore, states can complicate things by obstructing immigration enforcement and even shielding criminals from the federal agency that is responsible for enforcement; the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). They do by city, county and state laws, ordinances, and regulations that refuse or prohibit, “agencies from complying with ICE detainers, imposing unreasonable conditions on detainer acceptance, denying ICE access to interview incarcerated aliens, or otherwise impeding communication or information exchanges between their personnel and federal immigration officers.”2
Learn more about these “Sanctuary” places in Iowa here:
Map: Sanctuary Cities, Counties, and States (cis.org)
1 Overview of Naturalization Clause | Constitution Annotated | Congress.gov | Library of Congress
Part 6: The Wall
If I could describe the wall in one word: intermittent.
In another word: essential.
While on the border trip, agencies in Texas suggested that necessary assistance to the border states (Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona) not only be “boots on the ground” law enforcement agents for patrol but also financial contributions for the completion of the wall since the current federal policy under the Biden administration has halted all further construction.1
Landowners described to us their ever-changing experience with migrants as “the shift.” Because there is such a lack of continuity in the wall, migration routes change as the state develops infrastructure around the hot spots which then result in a “shift” to other paths of least resistance.
It was loud and clear that all the different agencies we gathered with unanimously agreed that finishing the border wall was an absolute necessity. This is in despite of the current federal policy which states, “Building a massive wall that spans the entire southern border and costs American taxpayers billions of dollars is not a serious policy solution or responsible use of Federal funds.”1
With the halting of the wall, the state of Texas made it very clear to us legislators that they support the completion of the wall and in the meantime, have been constructing their own “sea wire” barriers. They see a permanent wall as a force multiplier. Take the community we stayed at for example. Brownville, Texas, located on the most southern tip of Texas, recently experienced a surge of migrants due to opportunities to cross once Title 42 expired. With a quick infrastructure built along the river of fiberoptics, cameras, lighting and sensors, the path of least resistance was suddenly difficult, and the masses moved on to easier accesses.
Texas property owners further described to us how many residents living in Mexico simply enter the country at a point of entry, get processed so that they can have an ID number, set up the necessary requirements to receive aid in the form of food stamps and healthcare benefits then cross back over the border and continue living in Mexico.
It worthy to note that we were told many of the illegals crossing the border are NOT Mexicans. While we were in Brownsville, Texas, encamped across the river were 3,000 people from Venezuela. The next largest population of migrants lately hale from Columbia.
And I should forget to mention the border located on the southern tip of Mexico – paid for by the U.S. Every check point in Mexico is also paid for by the U.S. and personal are trained by America.
1: FACT SHEET: Department of Defense and Department of Homeland Security Plans for Border Wall Funds | OMB | The White House
| 
