November 17, 2010 Tough Law Reduced Immigrants, Study Shows
By <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/t/sabrina_tavern ise/index.html?inline=nyt-per> SABRINA TAVERNISE New York Times WASHINGTON - A study of an Arizona-style <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/i/immigration_ and_refugees/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier> immigration policy in Prince William County, Va., has found that it reduced the number of illegal immigrants in the county, but that its effect on violent crime was inconclusive. The study was conducted by the <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/u/univers ity_of_virginia/index.html?inline=nyt-org> University of Virginia and the <http://www.policeforum.org/> Police Executive Research Forum, a nonprofit group focused on improving police tactics, at the request of the county. It looked at data from 2007, when the policy was proposed, through 2009. Prince William County began enforcing the tough immigration law, similar to one that was passed later in Arizona and is now facing legal challenges, in 2008. The county's law required police officers to check the immigration status of anyone they had probable cause to believe was in the country illegally. The county executive, Corey Stewart, pushed the policy in a campaign that polarized residents. Hispanic groups criticized the policy as inflammatory. The county's police department, which paid for the study, expressed concern that the law would be expensive to carry out and that it would lead to accusations of racial profiling, and eight weeks later, it was suspended. It was later revised to apply only to those who had been arrested. While the county's foreign-born population more than doubled in the past decade, according to the <http://www.migrationpolicy.org/> Migration Policy Institute, a rise largely attributable to the housing boom in northern Virginia, the report found that there were 3,000 to 6,000 fewer illegal immigrants in the county in 2009, compared with 2006. "We are convinced that it's a clear result of the policy," said Thomas M. Guterbock, a professor of sociology and one of the authors of the study. It is not entirely clear whether reducing the illegal population was one of the policy's objectives. Mr. Stewart said in an interview last week that it was a desirable goal, but that the earlier, stricter policy had not been workable. "I believe that if someone is here illegally, they should be deported," he said. "But from a more practical perspective, we should be focusing on those illegal immigrants who are committing crimes." Illegal immigrants represent just 6 percent of the perpetrators of all serious crimes in the county, a small enough slice that measuring the effects of the policy on crime has been tricky. Christopher Koper, director of research at the research forum and one of the authors of the study, said a significant finding was the sharp drop in aggravated assaults immediately after the announcement of the policy in 2007. But the drop might have been a fall-off in frightened immigrants reporting crimes, he said. "We have no indication that the enforcement of the policy led to a reduction in crime," Mr. Koper said. "Crime trends have been steady." Eric Byler, a documentary film maker whose film, "9500 Liberty," captured the county's struggle with the law, noted that the stricter policy was in place only in March and April of 2008 and argued that it was too short-lived to have had much impact. The controversy it caused had perhaps the most serious effect, he said. "If anything this is the measure of the controversy's impact, not a measure of the policy's impact," he said. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------------------ -------------------------- Want to discuss this topic? Head on over to our discussion list, [email protected]. -------------------------- Brooks Isoldi, editor [email protected] http://www.intellnet.org Post message: [email protected] Subscribe: [email protected] Unsubscribe: [email protected] *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtmlYahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: [email protected] [email protected] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
