The town of Riverside, New Jersey, rescinded a local immigration passed last year. The cost of defending the law and lack of public support are cited as the reason.

In the US, immigration law is generally federal. The US Congress passes the laws that control visas and immigration, and various federal government agencies are charged with the implementation and enforcement of those laws. But there has been much debate in the US about whether the federal government has done its job appropriately. Since 2006, a number of state and local governments have passed immigration-related laws and ordinances in an attempt to control immigration at the local level. This has not met with uniform success, yet many local governments have passed such rules in an effort to extend their authority.

The Riverside law is a good example. The illegal immigration Relief Act penalized those who knowingly housed or employed individuals unlawfully in the US with fines, jail, and loss of business license as potential penalties. Because business groups and activists sued after the law was enacted, it was never enforced. These groups cited the negative impact the local immigration rule had on revenue as businesses closed or immigrants stopped doing business there. This small town also spent about $100,000 preparing the defend themselves in the suit.

In a law suit filed in another community regarding a similar local law, the court ruled the ordinance unconstitutional. These examples are likely the leading indicators of a trend of local communities to step back and leave the business of immigration to the federal government.

See Town Pulls Back on Immigration Law, New York Times, September 19, 2007, for more information.