Alabama's HB56: Good Old Southern Hate

Alabama passed the strictest anti-illegal immigration law in the country. Completely ignoring the Federal injunction against Arizona's SB1070, Alabama governor and Southern Baptist deacon Robert J Bentley gave his John Hancock on HB56, reviving what made the South so famous during the 1950s: Hate and Discrimination

Bentley was quoted as saying: "We have a real problem with illegal immigration in this country"

But...not in Alabama. And, last I heard, the Federal Government is the enforcer of laws cracking down on illegal immigration. Maybe we should ask the esteemed Senators from Alabama, Richard Shelby and Jeff Sessions. Yes, I am referring to the same Senators who blocked cloture on immigration bills on the Senate floor. I suppose when you say that we have a problem, elect people who do nothing and then reiterate that we have a problem...you really didn't do anything.

Back to the discrimination.

Illegal immigration comes from a variety of countries. But, the most visible and highest concentrated source of illegal immigration is Latin America and Mexico. But, Latinos only make up 3.9% of the population in Alabama. It must be easy to vote in a law targeting one ethnicity if that ethnicity isn't really represented in the population.

If we can eliminate the logical reason for passing HB56, then what are we left with? For the Alabama legislature, it would be nothing but discrimination. If the state cannot legally enforce this law, then it is just a bunch of angry white people lashing out.

The main job of migrants in the state of Alabama is agriculture. You show me a blue collar white Alabamian who wants to work in the fields for long hours and low pay, and I will eat my hat.

What's even more ridiculous about this law is not the fact that it makes it illegal to fire or refuse to hire a legal citizen if an illegal immigrant is on the payroll. No. It's also not the fact that it makes it illegal to rent property to illegal immigrants, instructs police to "make a reasonable attempt to determine a persons citizenship status," or that a legal contract is automatically void if entered into with an illegal immigrant. And, its even not that they use the same language that the Arizona law used ("reasonable suspicion") that made it a prime target for a Federal Injunction.

It's the backwardness. It's the lack of short term memory. It's the use of public funding (salaries) and time to make a completely symbolic gesture that will not be worth the paper it is written on. But above-all, its the institutional discrimination.