Alabama immigration law poses enforcement challenges for police

WASHINGTON
Police enforcing Alabama’s new immigration law cannot consider a person’s apparent national origin as they work to catch people who moved illegally to this nation from another, according to Alabama Director of Homeland Security Spencer Collier.

Spencer Collier

Collier said his agency has been teaching law enforcement officers about this and other rules that can complicate enforcement of what is widely viewed as the toughest immigration statute in the country.
A former Republican state representative from Irvington and state trooper, Collier said he is generally supportive of the controversial legislation’s intent. But had he still been in the Legislature, Collier said, he would have pushed for changes to solve some of the law’s enforcement difficulties before voting in favor of it.
"You can pass any bill that says anything, but it has to be practical, and I always tried to make it a habit of mine, especially on criminal statutes: Make sure it was practical and enforceable," Collier said in a telephone interview.
Officers enforcing the new Alabama law already had to be careful to stay within federal civil rights laws, particularly in light of the Civil Rights Act of 1871’s section 1983. That provision allows people who believe their constitutional rights were violated by government officials to bring suit against those officials.
Complicating their jobs, as well as Collier’s duty to keep them informed on how to carry out the law, is that parts of the legislation were shot down in court, and the rules changed.
"The last thing we want to happen is a police officer make a mistake, you know, commit a 1983 violation, and wind up in the crosshairs of the (U.S.) Department of Justice," Collier said. "So we’re doing everything we can, making sure they understand what they can and cannot do."
What are police allowed to consider when enforcing the law?
First, they must have a reason other than suspicion about a person’s immigration status to investigate immigration status, Collier said. Someone would need to be pulled over for speeding, for example.
Once officers have a legal basis for questioning a person’s immigration status, they can consider whether that individual has a driver’s license, had a license previously, can say where he or she is going and why, and how well that person speaks English, Collier said. One of these answers alone might not be enough to push an investigation forward, but several taken together may form a "reasonable suspicion" for law enforcement to proceed, he added. What can’t police consider?
"If you’re going to build reasonable suspicion to do an investigation after a traffic stop, you cannot base race, national origin, as part of that reasonable suspicion," Collier said. "Just by sight, an officer making the determination that someone looks Hispanic or they look Eastern European, that alone cannot be utilized."
The law’s section 10 originally required people to carry proof that they were in the country legally, but that provision was blocked pending appeal by 11th Circuit Court of Appeals. This was a significant change.
"We’ve talked to sheriffs and police chiefs, where arrests have been made, but most of the arrests were made under section 10," Collier said.
Collier and the office of Republican Gov. Robert Bentley were unable to say exactly how many people have been detained or arrested overall under the state’s new immigration law.
Collier resigned his House District 105 seat in January for his current spot in the Bentley cabinet.
When he was in the Legislature, Collier would sometimes buck his own party, and even the entire House of Representatives, on bills that Collier’s former law enforcement colleagues might find hard to uphold.
A 2009 bill to ban text messaging while driving passed 92-4. Collier, one of the four, explained his vote to the Birmingham News afterward: "I think it’s probably unenforceable. I think it’s going to be hard to identify if they are text messaging."

Asked his opinion of the new law, Collier deferred initially, saying his role now is to enforce the law, not to question it. Pressed on whether he would have voted for House Bill 56 if he were still a state representative, Collier laughed. "I knew this question was coming."
"It’s hard to know what I would have done, but I think, given my history, I think you know this: I would have made sure that law enforcement was at the table, and, you know, that practical application was taken into consideration," Collier said.
Collier brushed aside as "asinine" comparisons that opponents have made between the new law and Alabama’s troubled civil rights legacy of the 1950s and ‘60s.
"Illegal immigration is simply that: It’s illegal immigration. Codes and the federal statutes are clear that there’s a process to follow to be in this country legally," Collier said. "I just don’t think the comparison holds any water."