Alabama House committee approves bill targeting immigrants
The Hernandez Family joins a protest against anti immigration bills now proposed before Congress in Birmingham, Alabama,, on Saturday February 22, 2025. An Alabama House committee Wednesday approved legislation targeting immigrants. (Andi Rice for Alabama Reflector)
The House Judiciary Committee Wednesday approved legislation that requires law enforcement to verify people's immigration status during a stop if they have 'reasonable suspicion' they are not authorized to be in the country.
SB 53, sponsored by Sen. Wes Kitchens, R-Arab, also makes it a Class C felony, punishable by up to 10 years in prison, for someone to knowingly transport a person without proper authorization into the state.
'The intent of this bill, what we are trying to do, is to provide tools for our law enforcement officers,' Kitchens told members of the committee. 'If someone has broken the law, if the person has been arrested and taken to jail, to give the law enforcement officers and the jails, county, municipal, state jails, the authority they need to be able to verify immigration status when that individual was there.'
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Jasmin Hernandez-Alamillo, the community health coordinator for the Alabama Coalition for Immigrant Justice, a group that advocates for immigrants, attended the meeting and said he felt 'utter devastation' at the vote.
'They are not recognizing human beings as human beings,' he said. 'That makes me extremely upset because I come from immigrants. My family are immigrants. I work with immigrants every single day, and they do not see us as humans.'
The committee approved Kitchens' bill one week after the committee hosted a public hearing in which members heard from several who spoke against the legislation, with one pastor telling the committee it violates Christian values, and a second person saying it could prevent people from obtaining the necessary paperwork to bring their children back to their home country in the event they are deported.
The Senate approved the legislation in February, after the body removed language related to the 1850 Fugitive Slave Act, that forced the public to assist slave catchers return people to bondage to the south.
The bill offers several exceptions for people who are transporting people who are not legally authorized to live in the U.S. into Alabama, such as attorneys transporting clients to different immigration facilities or educators escorting their students for a school related activity.
Members of the House Judiciary Committee approved other exemptions to the crime of human smuggling as part of an amendment. One is for health care providers transporting patients, if people are transporting people for religious or charitable reasons, or people that an attorney who represents an individual authorizes.
'Many times people are already afraid of law enforcement and are already afraid to tell them, 'Hey, something is going on, something is going wrong in my community, I need help.'' Hernandez-Alamillo said. ' Particularly as it involves human trafficking, and I think this will dampen those efforts to try and eliminate that issue in our society.'
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Los Angeles Times
31 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Judge: Trump administration can dismantle Institute of Museum and Library Services
WASHINGTON — A federal judge on Friday denied a request by the American Library Assn. to halt the Trump administration's further dismantling of an agency that funds and promotes libraries across the country, saying that recent court decisions suggested his court lacked jurisdiction to hear the matter. U.S. District Judge Richard Leon had previously agreed to temporarily block the Republican administration, saying that plaintiffs were likely to show that Trump doesn't have the legal authority to unilaterally shutter the Institute of Museum and Library Services, which was created by Congress. But in Friday's ruling, Leon wrote that as much as the 'Court laments the Executive Branch's efforts to cut off this lifeline for libraries and museums,' recent court decisions suggested that the case should be heard in a separate court dedicated to contractual claims. He cited the Supreme Court's decision allowing the administration to cut hundreds of millions of dollars in teacher-training money despite a lower court order barring the cuts, saying that cases seeking reinstatement of federal grants should be heard in the Court of Federal Claims. The American Library Assn. and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees filed a lawsuit to stop the administration from gutting the institute after President Trump signed a March 14 executive order that refers to it and several other federal agencies as 'unnecessary.' The agency's appointed acting director then placed many staff members on administrative leave, sent termination notices to most of them, began canceling grants and contracts and fired all members of the National Museum and Library Services Board. The institute has roughly 75 employees and issued more than $266 million in grants last year. However, a Rhode Island judge's order prohibiting the government from shutting down the institute in a separate case brought by several states remains in place. The administration is appealing that order as well.
New York Post
31 minutes ago
- New York Post
Trump says Elon Musk will face ‘very serious consequences' if he funds Dems in future elections
WASHINGTON — President Trump warned Saturday that his former ally Elon Musk will face 'very serious consequences' if he starts bankrolling Democratic candidates for office after their nasty public split over a Republican spending bill working its way through Congress. 'If he does, he'll have to pay the consequences for that,' Trump told NBC News' Kristin Welker in an interview. 'He'll have to pay very serious consequences if he does that,' the president added. Advertisement 3 Musk and Trump have been feuding after the Tesla CEO spoke out on the president's 'big beautiful' bill. AP 'Is there anything else you just want people to know about the status,' Welker asked. 'No, not at all. We're doing great,' Trump replied. 'The bill is great. It looks like we're going to get it passed. Looks strongly like we're going to get it passed.' Advertisement 3 Musk was part of cabinet meetings during the first few months of Trump's second term. Molly Riley/White House / SWNS Musk knocked Trump during a multi-day X tirade over the debt increases contained in the 'big beautiful bill' earlier this week and said without his hundreds of millions of dollars in contributions, the president would never have been re-elected in 2024. Here is the latest on Donald Trump and Elon Musk's feud He also claimed credit for delivering the GOP a 53-47 majority in the Senate — and holding onto its majority in the House. Advertisement 3 Trump has hit back at Musk's comments in the ongoing feud. The Tesla and SpaceX billionaire contributed more than a quarter of a billion dollars to Republican candidates in the 2024 cycle, federal campaign filings show.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
How Trump's big bill could affect your taxes
President Trump's bill to cut taxes and spending centers on an extension of his previous round of tax cuts, which Republicans slated for expiration at the end of this year back in 2017. As such, it will preserve the status quo on many big parts of the code so that taxpayers won't see any change in things like the amount of money the government takes out of their paychecks. Other tax cuts in the legislation now moving through Congress will be brand new, though most of the new additions are scheduled to end after a few years. Here's a look at some of the big-ticket items in the latest round of GOP tax cuts. Trump's 2017 tax law cut many individual income tax rates, and those would continue into the future through the current legislation. Under current law and moving up the income spectrum, marginal rates are 10 percent, 12 percent, 22 percent, 24 percent, 32 percent, 35 percent, and 37 percent. The new GOP law will lock those rates in place. The extension of those rates will reduce federal revenues by $2.2 trillion through 2034, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT). If they were allowed to lapse, rates would change to 10 percent, 15 percent, 25 percent, 28 percent, 33 percent, 35 percent, and 39.6 percent. Only the 10-percent and 35-percent rates were left alone by the 2017 tax cuts. Trump in recent weeks floated letting the top rate go back to 39.6 percent from 37 percent as a way to lower the $3.8 trillion cost of the bill's tax portion, but he has since backed away from that idea. The law preserves — and temporarily boosts — the higher standard deduction, which was nearly doubled back in 2017. The new boost is $1,000 for individuals and $2,000 for couples filing jointly and will last for four years. This is paired with getting rid of personal exemptions, making tax filing simpler for many taxpayers. In 2024, the standard deduction was $14,600 for individuals and $29,200 for married couples. The higher standard deduction is projected to reduce revenues by $1.3 trillion through 2034. The loss of personal exemptions will add $1.9 trillion to federal revenues, resulting in a net revenue gain between the two measures. The bill creates a temporary full deduction for tips and overtime pay, allowing taxpayers to avoid paying taxes on those types of compensation. Taken together, the tax breaks will reduce revenues by about $164 billion through 2028 when they expire. People who work in the restaurant industry say they're concerned that the tax break will motivate customers to pay fewer gratuities, since tipping is left to the discretion of individual shoppers and diners as opposed to being a component of the employer-paid wage. 'I'm afraid that people are going to want to tip less with that income not being taxed,' one New York City bartender, who asked not to be named, told The Hill. The person also expressed concern that the no-tips rule could add to tensions in his restaurant between the front-of-house staff, who work for tips, and the kitchen staff, who do not. 'In the industry, the bigger concern is, why would the front-of-house not pay taxes when the back-of-house will still be paying taxes because they don't get tips?' the person said. Tax experts told The Hill the measures could add to the amount of paperwork that tax filers — both employers and employees — need to fill out, depending on how the IRS interprets the law and modifies its regulations and forms. The law gives an additional $4,000 tax break to seniors below a certain income threshold, which would be added to the $15,000 standard deduction and an already existing $2,000 deduction for seniors. Trump promised while campaigning to remove taxes on Social Security, which is funded through a payroll tax and then taxed again, above an income threshold, upon disbursal to bolster the Social Security fund along with Medicare. The enhanced deduction for seniors is a close substitute for the Social Security tax cancellation promised by Trump but is technically a different tax. According to congressional rules, the Social Social program cannot be altered through budget reconciliation, which is the legislative workaround Republicans are using to allow a party-line vote on their bill and avoid a Democratic filibuster in the Senate. Republicans haven't agreed on the most controversial provision of their tax bill — the state and local tax (SALT) deduction cap — but they're getting close. The initial proposal from the Ways and Means Committee raised the cap to $30,000, but members of the SALT caucus shot it down. Another proposal floated late Tuesday would bump the SALT deduction cap up to $40,000 — four times the current $10,000 cap — for people making $500,000 or less in income, three sources told The Hill. That level would increase by 1 percent a year over 10 years, according to one of the sources. Whatever they agree to, it will be expensive. Various estimates from the JCT put the cost of canceling the cap — which is a top priority for many blue-state Republicans — at around $1 trillion over 10 years. The SALT cap interacts with different parts of the tax code, including the higher standard deduction and the extended effective repeal of the alternative minimum tax (AMT), which costs more than $1.4 trillion in revenues. 'Even if you live in a place like New York, the combination of repealing the AMT and the $10,000 SALT cap was actually still positive for you. You were better off with the SALT cap because you lost the AMT than you would have been if the law hadn't happened at all,' Tax Policy Center senior fellow Howard Gleckman told The Hill. 'It was actually a good deal for people,' Gleckman said. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
