In the name of Schuette

You oppose same-sex marriage. You want to gut the Affordable Care Act. You object to President Obama´s plan to temporarily defer the deportation of 5 million undocumented immigrants.

Not on your agenda? It doesn´t matter. These are the positions advanced by Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette in federal courts. An MICKEY HIRTEN attorney general has wide latitude to pursue actions that advance a political agenda, and Schuette´s alignment with other Republican attorneys general does just that.

The deportation lawsuit is the latest example of Schuette’s padding his case for a 2018 gubernatorial run by currying favor with deep-pocket right-wing donors and Tea Party intolerants. Filed in the arch-conservative Southern District of Texas federal court, U.S. District Judge Andrew S. Hanen on Feb. 16 ordered a preliminary injunction to block government´s deferral action. It was done in your name.

Unlike the other 24 state plaintiffs in the case listed simply as the State of Alabama or Gov. Paul R. LePage, State of Maine, for our state it is “Bill Schuette, People of Michigan.” It may seem like a small distinction, but the symbolism shouldn´t be ignored. Think how it will look in campaign literature.

The case as summarized by Judge Hanen reflects Schuette´s concern about those people without citizenship. The judge wrote in his opinion:

“While the States are obviously concerned about national security, they are also concerned about their own resources being drained by the constant influx of illegal immigrants into their respective territories, and that this continual flow of illegal immigration has led and will lead to serious domestic security issues directly affecting their citizenry.”

But Hanen gives only passing credence to the domestic security issues. He is much more detailed in his treatment of Schuette´s and his fellow AG´s concern about the cost of providing driving licenses to undocumented immigrants. Texas charges just $24 for a license and claims that the cost to the state for an immigrant license is $174.73, largely because of reporting requirements and background checks. (In Michigan a license cost $25 and $18 for a renewal.) His analysis of this issue goes on for 13 pages.

The judge also bought the argument that undocumented immigrants will get preferential job treatment. But not because they work for less. As Hanen wrote:

“Plaintiffs allege that the DHS Directive will create a discriminatory employment environment that will encourage employers to hire DAPA beneficiaries instead of those with lawful permanent status in the United States.” Schuette and his AG plaintiffs argued that the Obama administration could in the future bar beneficiaries of the DAPA program from participating in the Affordable Care Act employer insurance mandate. Given this exclusion, they claim small business will be more likely to hire undocumented immigrants who can´t be covered, thereby avoiding the ACA´s mandatory insurance provision.

Never mind that employers must request proof — citizenship papers or a green card — that a potential employee is eligible to work in the United States.

Still, you´ve got to admire Schuette´s chutzpah citing the ACA, which he abhors, as a reason to overturn Obama´s initiative.

There is no doubt that America´s immigration policy is terribly flawed and that political self-interest and conflicting views on what to do and when are problems.

But what is often overlook — and certainly in the court´s preliminary injunction —are the well-documented benefits of undocumented workers.

A report by The Hill last August offered this perspective: “According to the Pew Research Hispanic Trends Project, there were 8.4 million unauthorized immigrants employed in the U.S.; representing 5.2 percent of the U.S. labor force (an increase from 3.8 percent in 2000). Their importance was highlighted in a report by Texas Comptroller Susan Combs that stated, “Without the undocumented population, Texas’ work force would decrease by 6.3 percent” and Texas’ gross state product would decrease by 2.1 percent. Furthermore, certain segments of the U.S. economy, like agriculture, are entirely dependent upon illegal immigrants.”

There are other benefits cited by immigration advocates. The U.S. Department of Agriculture in a May 2012 analysis of immigration and the farm economy concluded that “a large reduction in the number of unauthorized workers in all sectors of the U.S. economy would lead to a long-run reduction in output and exports in both agriculture and the broader economy.” Similarly, the Council on Foreign Relations in a special report by Professor Gordon H. Hanson of the University of California, San Diego, concluded that stemming illegal immigration would likely lead to a net drain on the U.S. economy.”

Then there is Social Security. Undocumented immigrants have paid $100 billion into the trust fund during the past decade. “They are paying an estimated $15 billion a year into Social Security with no intention of ever collecting benefits," SSA´s chief actuary Stephen Goss has said in numerous interviews.

It´s not the way “Bill Schuette, People of Michigan” look at the issue. But it´s how your views are portrayed in courts whether you like it or not.