EDITORIAL: Bill to let police enforce U.S. immigration laws isn’t likely to succeed

While the primary public focus of Texas’ third special legislative session that began Monday has been on school vouchers, it is only one of several topics Gov. Greg Abbott ordered addressed. At least as much attention and activity during the past week have been devoted to furthering the governor’s anti-immigration efforts.

Some of the immigration bills that have been filed so far are much like previous measures that already have been ruled unconstitutional. Perhaps Abbott and some lawmakers hope the current majority on the U.S. Supreme Court, which at times seems to place more value in party positions than on legal precedent, will reverse some of those previous decisions.

One new bill is yet another effort to charge local law enforcement agencies with enforcing federal immigration laws. Another bill would make illegal entry into this country a state jail crime.

Officials in many cities and counties have raised concerns about these measures as matters of cost and practicality, saying enforcement and detention of immigrants would overburden officers, courts and jails. A case in point would be Hidalgo County, which already sends excess inmates to Willacy County for detention.

Also, many sheriffs and police officials worry that local immigration enforcement compromises public safety because witnesses and victims won’t report crimes for fear of deportation, allowing violent criminals to remain at large.

More importantly, courts have thrown out previous local-enforcement measures, asserting that only federal officers can enforce federal laws. Just last year the conservative Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals invalidated Abbott’s order for state Department of Public Safety officers and National Guard troops to arrest suspected illegal crossers.

Legal observers say the current bill is similar to one passed in Arizona — popularly known then as a “show your papers” law — more than a decade ago. The Supreme Court in 2012 ruled it and other state immigration policies unconstitutional, saying “that the formulation of these policies is entrusted exclusively to Congress has become about as firmly embedded in the legislative and judicial tissues of our body politic as any aspect of our government.”

It’s also worth noting that in its annexation treaty, Texas, which was an independent country at the time, ceded control of its borders to the U.S. federal government.

In fact, it was the federal government that set the state and U.S. boundary as the Rio Grande rather than the Nueces River, and defended its claim through the Mexican-American War and negotiation of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo.

That treaty and the annexation bill carry as much weight as the constitutional provisions that are being challenged.

Certainly, our immigration laws are broken and the strain on our local communities is intolerable. Instead of wasting time and taxpayers’ money fighting the same futile fight over and over again, state officials should invest their efforts in working with Texas members of Congress to fashion and promote legislation that places the onus where it belongs — at our nation’s capital.