The U.S. Department of Justice has warned Gov. Reynolds that it will sue the state of Iowa if the Reynolds administration attempts to enforce SF 2340, the Des Moines Register reported on Friday. That bill, which Reynolds signed into law last month, would usurp the federal government’s enforcement of immigration laws by transferring some federal powers related to immigration to police and state judges in Iowa.
“SF 2340 is preempted by federal law and violates the United States Constitution,” Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Brian Boynton wrote in a letter to Reynolds obtained by the Register.
Boyton informed the governor the DOJ “intends to bring a lawsuit to enforce the supremacy of federal law and to enjoin” the state from enforcing SF 2340.
The bill makes it a state crime for a person to be in Iowa if they have previously been denied entry into the U.S. or deported or otherwise removed from the country. That is already a federal crime, which is enforced by Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the U.S. Border Patrol. SF 2340 also empowers Iowa judges to issue deportation orders and order people removed from the state and transported to the nearest port of entry, even though those powers have been exclusively reserved for federal judges since the 19th century.
“This bill isn’t just a piece of legislation; it’s an attack on our community’s very essence,” Jose Alvarado from Latinx Immigrants of Iowa said in a statement last month. The group organized the vigil protesting SF 2340 at the Iowa State Capitol on Wednesday. Other protest vigils took place Wednesday in Iowa City, Davenport and Waterloo.
It’s not just immigrant rights advocates that object to SF 2340. Law enforcement officials also object to it.
“The problems at the southern border cannot be solved from Des Moines, Iowa,” Marshalltown Chief of Police Michael W. Tupper said regarding SF 2340. “Playing politics with public safety never helps public safety. This law will make the job of law enforcement more difficult. It will diminish public safety because it will cause people to fear the police needlessly. This law has severely harmed community relationships that took decades to build.”
According to Des Moines Chief of Police Dana Wingert, SF 2340 is unworkable for local law enforcement agencies.
“Local law enforcement lacks access to a database that allows us to confirm immigration status. Simply stated, not only do we not have the resources to assume this additional task, we don’t even have the ability to perform this function …” he said in an email to WOI-TV news after the bill passed the legislature. “I’m not interested, nor are we equipped, funded or staffed to take on additional responsibilities that historically have never been a function of local law enforcement.”
SF 2340 passed both houses of the Iowa Legislature with only Republican support.
In a written statement responding to questions from the Register, Reynolds struck a defiant tone and said she intends to fully enforce SF 2340.
“I have a duty to protect the citizens of Iowa,” the governor said. “Unlike the federal government, we will respect the rule of law and enforce it.”
SF 2340 is modeled on one passed in Texas last November. The DOJ sued Texas over the law and enforcement of it is currently blocked by an injunction, while its constitutionality is considered by the courts. Over 150 years of U.S. Supreme Court decisions establish that immigration law and its enforcement is a federal, not state, matter.
Prior to the Texas law, and the derivative bill in Iowa, the last time a state tried to usurp federal immigration authority and give it to local law enforcement was just before the 2010 midterm elections when President Barack Obama was in the White House.
That year, Arizona’s Republican-led legislature passed a similar bill allowing for the arrest of anyone suspected of being in the country illegally who was not carrying identification proving their immigration status. It was signed into law by Gov. Jan Brewer, who at that time was considered one of the most rightwing Republican governors in the country. The law — which became popularly known as the “Papers Please law” — was blocked by an injunction, and in 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court struck it down, leaving intact only the provision authorizing law enforcement officials to check a person’s immigration status if they have been arrested for an offense unrelated to immigration laws.
SF 2340 is scheduled to go into effect on July 1. Boyton gave Reynolds a deadline of May 7 to respond to his letter.