Every week since late April when Arizona passed its egregious SB 1070 law, -- which makes it a crime to be within state borders if you lack legal status -- I receive an email update from one of my colleagues with the slew of copy cat anti-immigrant legislation being considered and implemented at the state level. This week's email highlights Pennsylvania, Texas and Tennessee.

The Pennsylvania House just passed the Industry Employment Verification Act (IEVA), which bans construction jobs for undocumented immigrants and stipulates that companies who hire them will lose government contracts and licenses. This bill is now moving to the state Senate. The IEVA bill stipulates that companies working for the government must use the electronic verification system, known as E-Verify, to determine whether individuals have been granted permission to work in the United States. The E-verify system is highly problematic due to the impact that human error can have on preventing qualified candidates from employment. In addition, this system wrongfully outsources immigration enforcement, an exclusive province of the federal government, to businesses and contractors.

At the GOP convention in Texas, Republicans voted to propose that state law require police to verify that people arrested on suspicion of a crime are in the country legally. In Tennessee, a bill requiring jailers to determine immigration status of inmates was sent to the Governor's desk on Wednesday after approval by both houses.

The trend is obvious. Frustrated by the federal government's immigration fumbling, state legislators are attempting to usurp enforcement authority. Here's the problem: contractors, local police and jail wardens do not receive the same training as federal police to properly implement enforcement policy. Moreover, undocumented immigrants threatened by deportation are pushed further into the shadows when they believe they are being actively hunted by local police and employers. This does not make our communities safer, but puts them at greater risk as individuals cease to report crimes like theft, domestic violence and exploitation in the workplace out of fear they may be separated from their families.

Just last week, the Asian American Institute (AAI), along with 25 other faith and secular organizations, submitted a friend of the court (amici curae) brief against Arizona's SB 1070 citing among many grievances that the law "creates two tiers of individuals: in the first tier, those individuals who do not arouse Arizona law enforcement officers' suspicion of illegal status; and in the second tier, those individuals who -- whether because of their ethnicity, clothing, accent, or skin color -- do."

Those following the developments of SB 1070 closely know that the original text of the law stipulated that a police officer could demand immigration papers from any person they deemed "reasonably suspicious." The ensuing uproar over the likelihood of racial profiling led the Arizona legislature to pass an amended version of the law prohibiting race, color or national origin from being used to justify policy questioning. The amicus brief correctly challenges this palliative measure, noting "it is difficult to imagine how even the most conscientious law enforcement official would be able to avoid observing and thus considering those factors [race, color, national origin] when assessing whether 'reasonable suspicion' exists." In other words, legislators' superficial attempts to stave off legitimate complaints about the law's potential violations will be ineffective and the problem remains that SB 1070 basically creates a second class of individuals who are required to carry proof at all times of their right to be here.

Arizona's attempt to regulate immigration at the state level has proven a failure even before its official activation at the end of July. Just yesterday, an article in the Arizona Republic asserted that the Maricopa County Attorney's Office found that implementation of the new law will be difficult because it is based on outdated provisions of federal law with extremely narrow legal parameters. SB 1070 has incontrovertibly demonstrated the delicateness and complexity of immigration policymaking. Copy cats in other states should take heed from Arizona's example and cease their efforts to arrogate immigration enforcement. Instead, they must direct their passion and energy to Congress and the White House to demand federal comprehensive reforms that are efficient, realistic and humane.

Juliana Schnur

Juliana Schnur is an Eisendrath Legislative Assistant at the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism. She is a graduate of New York University.