Washington Examiner  home delivery | classifieds | autos | jobs | real estate | home listings | advertise
   
Dining stimulus plan
Welcome,   My Account |  Log out
Welcome, Guest  Sign In |  Register
Monday, March 22, 2010 | Last Update 11:56 EDT
View today's E-Dition

click for forecast
Home News Politics Local Opinion Economy Sports Lifestyle Classifieds Jobs Autos Home Listings
Nation World Beltway Confidential Yeas & Nays Opinion Zone Weather Mobile Site RSS Feeds Contact
Nation World Science Education RSS Feeds
Beltway Confidential Yeas & Nays White House Congress Michael Barone Byron York Chris Stirewalt
Local Front DC Virginia Maryland Blogs Crime Transportation People Education Real Estate Events Calendar
Editorials Beltway Confidential OpinionZone Nate Beeler Columnists Mark Tapscott Dave Freddoso Mark Hemingway
Your Money Real Estate Technology K-Street
Blogs Redskins/NFL Wizards/NBA Caps/NHL Nationals/MLB United/MLS Colleges Golf
Yeas & Nays Movies Television Music Health Events Calendar

Local
[Print]  [Email]         Share    

Opposing groups probe immigration policies in Md.

By: Kathleen Miller
Examiner Staff Writer
January 2, 2009


Two organizations with opposing concerns about illegal-immigration enforcement are reviewing county policies across Maryland and laying the groundwork for potential lawsuits aimed at how local jurisdictions handle immigration issues.

Leaders of the American Civil Liberties Union of Maryland are seeking information from all 23 Maryland counties, plus the city of Baltimore, about immigration-related issues. They want the details of every publicly enacted ordinance or internal policy that directs police, social services agencies, real estate agents, landlords and local employers to classify or treat people differently due to immigration status.

“By interacting with other ACLU affiliates in other states, we have come across examples of counties having informal or unwritten procedures about proving citizenship and what to do with immigrants once they are detained,” said Ajmel Quereshi, a lawyer and ACLU fellow. “We wanted to see if this is happening in Maryland.”

Quereshi cited Anne Arundel County, Frederick County and Gaithersburg policies he considers “anti-immigration ordinances” that give the ACLU cause for concern.

Brad Botwin, founder of anti-illegal-immigration group Help Save Maryland, said his group is filing a “piggyback” request to be copied on all information given to the ACLU.

“We will track their every move on this so we can counter anything they may decide to do in the future,” Botwin said. “They are going after jurisdictions like Frederick County that have taken the important step of going after illegal aliens in their community. They say that’s racial profiling. I just don’t see it.”

Anne Arundel County Executive John Leopold forbids contractors to hire illegal immigrants to work on county projects, and police in Frederick County have been trained to enforce federal immigration laws. In Gaithersburg, City Council members passed an anti-solicitation ordinance two years ago that made looking for work or workers along city streets a misdemeanor, a move some complained targeted immigrant day laborers. Last spring, Maryland Attorney General Douglas Gansler said the rule ran afoul of the First Amendment and Maryland’s vehicle laws and city leaders began exploring other options.

Quereshi stopped short of saying that the ACLU would sue counties over their local immigration policies. “We want to get a sense of whether laws are being discriminatorily enforced against immigrants,” Quereshi said. “Once that is done, we’ll see if individual cases raise constitutional concerns.”

Topics

illegal , immigration , organizations , two , enforcement , policies , Maryland



To view this site, you need to have Flash Player 8.0 or later installed. Click here to get the latest Flash player.


Most Popular Headlines
  1. Rules Committee meeting descends into chaos
  2. Democrats to America: Drop dead
  3. Support surges for Stupak's re-election opponent after abortion funding deal with White House
  4. Questions about the Stupak deal
  5. William Saunders: Democrats' EO offer shows Obamacare does fund abortion
  6. Stupak is still a firm "no"
  7. Pro-Life group withdraws award scheduled for Stupak UPDATE: Was Stupak bought with $726,409 for airports?
  8. 16,500 more IRS agents needed to enforce Obamacare
  9. Either learn to love Obamacare, or sue to stop it
  10. Health care reform means more power for the IRS





 


 



 

Reader Comments

All comments on this page are subject to our Terms of Use and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Examiner or its staff. Comment box is limited to 200 words. Warning: If you comment, the Disqus platform default is set to email you when other reply to it. If you do not want to receive these replies to your comment, please uncheck the box.


blog comments powered by Disqus


Local

Deadly accidents involving iPods alarm officials

At least three people in the Washington region have died in accidents in the last year, while wearing headphones. Full story

Sports

NCAA Tournament: Games to watch, March 19, 2010

No. 5 Temple vs. No. 12 Cornell Where »... Full story

Scoop

Scoop: Bullock’s marriage called a total sham

More revelations are emerging about the... Full story

Internships | Maps | RSS | Twitter | Facebook | Mobile | Contact Us | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Rack Locations | Advertise