Skip to Content

Just the Facts

Immigration Fact Checks provide up-to-date information on the most current issues involving immigration today.

The Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) Program: A Fact Sheet

Immigration law is highly complex. Determining which non-citizens are “lawfully” or “unlawfully” present and whether they should be allowed to stay in the United States are complex matters which involve the interpretation of a range of federal laws and regulations, broad policy considerations, and prioritization of existing resources, to name just a few considerations.

Alabama and other states that have passed harsh anti-immigration laws don’t understand this complexity. State legislators seem to want a fast, simple answer to the question of whether someone is lawfully or unlawfully present in the United States. These states are planning to lean heavily on the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) program or some other system of verification, such as E-verify, as the mechanism for determining whether someone is unlawfully present in the country.

But there is no magic database or system that gives the simple, speedy determination of unlawful presence that states crave. The SAVE program, operated by the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), does not and was never designed to meet these needs. SAVE can only verify immigration status or immigration information at a particular point in time, and cannot determine whether someone is unlawfully present in the U.S. E-Verify is a federal database that can only be used to verify a worker’s authorization to work in the U.S.Read more...

Published On: Thu, Dec 15, 2011 | Download File

Secure Communities: A Fact Sheet

Updated 11/29/11 - While the implementation by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) of the state/local partnership agreements known as the 287(g) program has been a source of great controversy, it is far from the only tool ICE uses to engage state and local law enforcement in immigration control.  Most notably, the Secure Communities Program, which launched in March 2008, has been held out as a simplified model for state and local cooperation with federal immigration enforcement. This fact sheet lays out the basics of Secure Communities program, how it works, key areas of concern and recommendations on how to improve the program. Read more...

Published On: Tue, Nov 29, 2011 | Download File

Bad for Business: How Alabama’s Anti-Immigrant Law Stifles State Economy

Although key provisions of Alabama’s HB 56 are on hold while its constitutionality is being tested in the courts, evidence is mounting of the growing fiscal and economic impact of the new law. State economic experts and business leaders agree that the law has already caused hardship for Alabama’s businesses and citizens.
Read more...

Published On: Wed, Nov 09, 2011 | Download File

Checklist for Estimating the Costs of SB 1070-Style Legislation

(Updated November 2011) - Arizona’s infamous anti-immigrant law, SB 1070, has spawned many imitators.  In a growing number of state houses around the country, bills have been passed or introduced which—like SB 1070—create new state immigration crimes and expand the power of police to enforce immigration laws.  Some state laws would make E-Verify mandatory for all businesses, require schools to check students’ immigration status, or make it a crime to “harbor or transport” unauthorized immigrants.  State legislators who are thinking of jumping on the immigration enforcement bandwagon, however, would be wise to consider the costs of such legislation.  State immigration enforcement laws impose unfunded mandates on the police, jails, and courts; drive away workers, taxpayers, and consumers upon whom the state economy depends; and invite costly lawsuits and tourist boycotts.  These are economic consequences which few states can afford at a time of gaping budget deficits.

The following is a guide to calculating the costs associated with state-level immigration enforcement bills:

Cost to Police

  • Costs associated with a projected increase in arrests by police.
  • Average number of hours needed for police to detain someone for a particular offense, determine their legal status, transport them to a police station, book them, complete a report, prepare for court, and testify in court.
  • Average cost per hour for police to complete these tasks.
  • [Number of additional arrests] x [number of hours per arrest] x [cost per hour for an arrest] = cost to police.

Cost to JailsRead more...

Published On: Tue, Nov 08, 2011 | Download File

New Americans in Virginia

The Political and Economic Power of Immigrants, Latinos, and Asians in the Old Dominion State (Updated October 2011)

More than 1 in 9 Virginians are immigrants.

  • The foreign-born share of Virginia’s population rose from 5.0% in 1990, to 8.1% in 2000, to 11.4% in 2010, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. Virginia was home to 911,119 immigrants in 2010, which is more than the total population of Austin, Texas.
  • 45.5% of immigrants (or 414,714 people) in Virginia were naturalized U.S. citizens in 2010—meaning that they are eligible to vote.
  • 9.3% of all registered voters in Virginia are “New Americans”—naturalized citizens or the U.S.-born children of immigrants who were raised during the current era of immigration from Latin America and Asia which began in 1965—according to the U.S. Census Bureau.

1 in 8 Virginians are Latino or Asian—and they vote.Read more...

Published On: Wed, Oct 19, 2011 | Download File

Fiscally Irresponsible: Immigration Enforcement without Reform Wastes Taxpayer Dollars

Many political pundits, GOP presidential aspirants, and Members of Congress want to have it both ways when it comes to federal spending on immigration. On the one hand, there is much talk about the need for fiscal austerity, and a Congressional “super-committee” is currently working on slashing federal spending in order to reduce the deficit. On the other hand, even though the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) just announced a record high number of deportations, some still want to increase federal spending on immigration enforcement; putting more Border Patrol boots on the ground, completing the border fence, and deploying an array of high-tech gadgetry. However, they miss one very important fact: piling on more immigration enforcement without immigration reform is a practical and fiscal dead-end.

Over the past decade, the federal government has spent tens of billions of dollars trying to keep unauthorized immigrants out of the United States, or trying to get them out of the country if they are already here. The end result? Roughly 11 million unauthorized immigrants now call the United States home, the majority have been here for more than 10 years, and many have U.S.-born children. In short, the “enforcement only” approach to unauthorized immigration has proven to be costly and ineffective.Read more...

Published On: Wed, Oct 19, 2011 | Download File

New Americans in Maryland

The Political and Economic Power of Immigrants, Latinos, and Asians in the Old Line State.  (Updated October 2011)

Immigrants and their children are growing shares of Maryland’s population and electorate.

  • The foreign-born share of Maryland’s population rose from 6.6% in 1990, to 9.8% in 2000, to 13.9% in 2010, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. Maryland was home to 803,695 immigrants in 2010, which is more than the total population of Memphis, Tennessee.
  • 44.9% of immigrants (or 360,932 people) in Maryland were naturalized U.S. citizens in 2010—meaning that they are eligible to vote.
  • 10.4% (or 294,065) of registered voters in Maryland were “New Americans”—naturalized citizens or the U.S.-born children of immigrants who were raised during the current era of immigration from Latin America and Asia which began in 1965—according to an analysis of 2008 Census Bureau data by Rob Paral & Associates.

1-in-8 Marylanders are Latino or Asian.Read more...

Published On: Fri, Oct 07, 2011 | Download File

New Americans in Kansas

The Political and Economic Power of Immigrants, Latinos, and Asians in the Sunflower State. (Updated October 2011)

Immigrants and their children are growing shares of Kansas’s population and electorate.

  • The foreign-born share of Kansas’s population rose from 2.5% in 1990, to 5.0% in 2000, to 6.5% in 2010, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. Kansas was home to 186,942 immigrants in 2010, which is roughly the total population of Salt Lake City, Utah.
  • 32.5% of immigrants (or 60,779 people) in Kansas were naturalized U.S. citizens in 2010—meaning that they are eligible to vote.
  • 3.7% (or 49,673) of registered voters in Kansas were “New Americans”—naturalized citizens or the U.S.-born children of immigrants who were raised during the current era of immigration from Latin America and Asia which began in 1965—according to an analysis of 2008 Census Bureau data by Rob Paral & Associates.

1 in 8 Kansans are Latino or Asian.Read more...

Published On: Fri, Oct 07, 2011 | Download File

New Americans in Alabama

The Economic Power of Immigrants, Latinos, and Asians in the Yellowhammer State. (Updated October 2011)

Read more...

Published On: Fri, Oct 07, 2011 | Download File

Immigration and the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA): A Q&A Fact Check

Q: What is the Defense of Marriage Act?
A: In 1996, Congress passed the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Section 3 of DOMA defines marriage as a legal union between one man and one woman. At the time DOMA was enacted, no state permitted same-sex marriages. Today, six states and the District of Columbia permit same-sex marriages; several other states honor out-of-state marriages and/or recognize civil unions.

Q: How does DOMA affect immigration cases?
A: There are approximately 36,000 same-sex binational couples living in the United States, and approximately half of these couples are raising children.

Because immigration law is federal, the immigration agencies apply DOMA’s definition of marriage. This means that even gay and lesbian couples who are lawfully married are not considered married for immigration purposes. As a result, gay and lesbian U.S. citizens and permanent residents cannot successfully petition for their spouses; same-sex spouses cannot accompany their American spouse who receives a family or employment-based visa; and lesbian and gay noncitizens cannot obtain a waiver or relief from removal based on their marriage. Essentially, DOMA prevents same-sex couples from receiving the same immigration benefits that different-sex couples receive.Read more...

Published On: Thu, Aug 18, 2011 | Download File