A federal judge has temporarily blocked a newly signed Idaho immigration law from taking effect, following a lawsuit filed by the ACLU of Idaho. The lawsuit challenges a controversial bill signed into law by Idaho Governor Brad Little on Thursday, which allows law enforcement to record an individual’s documentation status if they are suspected of committing a crime.
House Bill 83, modeled after a 2023 Texas law, establishes two new immigration offenses in Idaho: “illegal entry” and “illegal reentry.” The law targets individuals without proper immigration status, as well as those who have been previously deported and attempt to re-enter the state. Under the law, individuals can only be charged with these offenses if they are suspected of committing another crime. Additionally, the law creates the offense of “trafficking a dangerous illegal alien,” which criminalizes knowingly transporting an unauthorized immigrant with a past criminal conviction in the U.S. or another country. The law also grants immunity to law enforcement officers, protecting them from lawsuits arising from damages or liability incurred during enforcement.
The law is part of Idaho’s response to unauthorized immigration, which affects an estimated 35,000 unauthorized immigrants living in the state, according to a report from the University of Idaho’s McClure Center for Public Policy.
The ACLU of Idaho swiftly filed the lawsuit, arguing that the law violates the U.S. Constitution in three key areas. The plaintiffs, including the Idaho Organization of Resource Councils (IORC), The Alliance of Idaho, and five anonymous individuals, argue that the law infringes on the Supremacy Clause, which states that federal law overrides state law in immigration matters. The lawsuit also claims the law violates the Commerce Clause, which prohibits states from regulating immigration in a way that burdens interstate and foreign commerce. Furthermore, the plaintiffs contend that the law is vague and unclear, making it difficult for individuals to understand the legal implications.
ACLU of Idaho Legal Director Paul Carlos Southwick emphasized that similar laws in Texas, Iowa, and Oklahoma have been challenged successfully on these grounds. “We expect the court to rule in our favor here,” Southwick said.
The bill’s sponsors argue that the law targets criminals, aiming to curb unauthorized migration and prevent dangerous immigrants from entering the state. However, Southwick and ACLU attorney Emily Croston argue that the law is not focused solely on criminals. Under the law, individuals could be arrested, detained, or prosecuted based solely on suspicion of committing any crime, even minor offenses like littering or shoplifting. “The law allows police to engage in prosecuting these crimes even if someone is never convicted of the minor crimes they are suspected of,” Croston said.
The ACLU also raised concerns that the law could discourage unauthorized immigrants from reporting crimes they’ve witnessed or experienced, fearing they may be detained or prosecuted under the new law.
The law went into effect immediately upon the governor’s signature due to an emergency clause, but the temporary restraining order issued by the court will prevent its enforcement for 14 days. A preliminary injunction hearing is scheduled for April 10 at the James A. McClure Federal Building and U.S. Courthouse in Boise. If granted, the injunction could block the law’s enforcement during the litigation process. The case has been assigned to U.S. District Judge Amanda Brailsford.
Related topics:
- Targeted Immigration Enforcement Efforts Begin in Chicago
- Southeast Bank Partners with Visa to Enhance Digital Payment Solutions
- Dhaka Urges Canada to Speed Up Student Visa Processing
