By Ira Mehlman
FAIR
An entirely predictable thing has happened since Texas Gov. Greg Abbott signed S.B. 4 into law on December 18. The number of illegal migrants encountered by Customs and Border Protection (CPB) has been cut by more than half. In December, CBP recorded 125,815 encounters along the five Border Patrol sectors that comprise Texas’ 1,250 miles of border with Mexico. By March, that figure had fallen to 54,180. Moreover, S.B. 4 has not even gone into effect as legal challenges to the law work their way through the courts.
The decline in illegal entries in Texas due to S.B. 4 and the state’s deployment of manpower and physical barriers along the border has been offset by an equally predictable surge in illegal entries in Arizona and California. Over the past several months, the Tucson and San Diego Border Patrol sectors have jockeyed for the dubious distinction of recording the highest numbers of illegal entries. For those keeping score at home, San Diego is now edging out Tucson for the lead.
Despite the new surge in illegal crossings, Arizona and California have gone the opposite direction from Texas. Gov. Katie Hobbs vetoed an Arizona bill that was modeled after S.B. 4. In California, just the thought of the Assembly sending an immigration enforcement bill to Gov. Gavin Newsom’s desk is unimaginable.
Thus, the crisis continues in California. “San Diego is the new epicenter for migrants and illegal immigration,” declared County Supervisor Jim Desmond (although places like New York City and Denver might quibble). And inheriting the mantle of the epicenter of the illegal immigration crisis comes with consequences. “Human smugglers have identified California, particularly the San Diego border sector, as the path of least resistance for illegal immigration. Border Patrol has inadvertently become the ‘Uber’ for migrants entering San Diego County, and the County is the travel agent,” Desmond lamented.
More than 30,000 migrants have arrived in the county over the past two months, and a thousand or more new ones arrive every day. Once there, the migrants become the responsibility of the state, county and local communities. California is “inflicting this upon ourselves,” said Desmond. “You know, we give … migrants free health care. We can even give them free legal advice, not advice, but we’ll pay for their attorneys if they’re deported. Local law enforcement is prohibited, prohibited from enforcing immigration law,” he added. With that sort of full smorgasbord of benefits, assistance, services and protections, there is every reason to expect that many of the migrants crossing in San Diego will decide to remain.
Remaining, however, is not an inevitability, as Florida is proving. Sensible state laws, in the face of senseless federal policies, can not only deter illegal aliens from taking up residence in those jurisdictions, but can even convince well-established illegal aliens to move elsewhere. A pearl-clutching NPR report titled, “Anguish and Fear in Florida,” finds at least anecdotal evidence that S.B. 1718, signed into law by Gov. Ron DeSantis last year, is having the intended effect.
Among other things, S.B. 1718 bars illegal aliens from obtaining driver’s licenses and imposes meaningful penalties against businesses that employ illegal aliens. “It’s hard to say how many undocumented immigrants left Florida after S.B. 1718 passed. Most people NPR spoke to in and around Fort Myers said leaving the state, or planning to, is an everyday discussion,” noted reporter Jasmine Garsd.
Florida is not an anomaly. Deep in the interior of the country, Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds signed S.F. 2340 into law on April 10, modeled after laws enacted in Texas. Though the law is not even scheduled to take effect until July 1, the impact has been immediate. As one long-time illegal alien resident of Iowa told CNN, “I may not be eligible to vote, but I can vote with my feet.” Ironically, her feet (or some other mode of transportation) plan on taking her to Arizona, where the governor vetoed a similar law.
Texas, Florida, Iowa and other states that contemplating similar laws are not solving the illegal immigration problem. That can only be accomplished by the federal government, which is highly unlikely under the current administration. What these states have shown is that where illegal aliens settle after they get here is a choice, which, under the circumstances, is the best they can do.
