Tuesday, November 17, 2015

Can States Legally Deny Refugees ?

At least 16 governors, all but one of them Republican, have vowed not to accept any refugees from Syria into their states in response to the revelation that one of the Paris terrorists may have entered Europe as part of a wave of migrants from the war-torn region. The move complicates the Obama administration’s plan to accept 10,000 Syrians into the country over the next year.

“I will not stand complicit to a policy that places the citizens of Alabama in harm’s way,” Gov. Robert Bentley of Alabama announced Monday. Georgia Gov. Nathan Deal also refused to accept any more refugees and demanded that the Obama administration “confirm the identities” of 59 Syrians recently settled in his state. The governors of Indiana, Michigan, Arkansas, Texas, Mississippi, Ohio, Illinois, Massachusetts, Wisconsin, Maine and Arizona also stated their opposition to accepting Syrian refugees. Meanwhile, presidential candidates Jeb Bush and Ted Cruz have suggested that only Christians from the region should be granted refuge.

“That’s shameful. That’s not American, it’s not who we are,“ President Obama responded Monday.


These governors are likely standing on shaky ground, as there is no legal way for them to prevent refugee resettlement, according to multiple experts. And their opposition is largely symbolic, since once Syrians (or any refugees) are in the U.S., they have the right to travel anywhere they want, just like any other resident. If the Obama administration wanted to challenge these governors on their threats, they would handily beat them in court, experts say.

Lavinia Limon, former director of the U.S. Office of Refugee Resettlement under Pres. Bill Clinton, said these governors misunderstand the Constitution.

“It’s really a question of fundamental freedoms,” Limon said. “If you’re legally residing in the United States, you have the right to move wherever you wish to. We could resettle a refugee in New York City today, and tomorrow they could decide to move to Dallas.”

But that might not matter. Refugee resettlement involves the coordination of local nonprofits and government officials with federal agencies, and forcing newly arrived legal residents into communities that don’t want them likely sounds unappealing to everyone involved.

“My suspicion is that if a state was firmly opposed to having Syrian refugees in their borders then as an initial matter, the government might choose to put them somewhere else,” said Jack Chin, a law professor at the University of California at Davis. “Why fight that fight?”

State Department spokesman Mark Toner’s muted reaction to the governors’ threats on Monday seemed to confirm that suspicion. Toner told reporters Monday that the department’s lawyers were reviewing the question of whether governors could refuse to settle Syrian refugees. He struck a conciliatory note, saying he understood the governors’ concerns but reassured them that the department’s security vetting of Syrian refugees was thorough.

No comments:

Post a Comment