States Fight Back: Missouri and Mississippi Introduce Bounty Hunter Programs for Immigration Enforcement

Border patrol agents detaining a group of immigrants.

Missouri and Mississippi are blazing a trail in immigration enforcement with proposed legislation that would enlist bounty hunters to apprehend criminal illegal aliens. This bold move aims to address the growing concerns over illegal immigration and its impact on public safety. How will the proposed bounty hunter program impact local communities?

Bounty Hunters: A New Frontier in Immigration Enforcement

The proposed legislation in Missouri (Senate Bill 72) and Mississippi (House Bill 1484) aims to establish a certified bounty hunter program targeting illegal immigrants with criminal records or deportation orders. This initiative represents a significant shift in state-level immigration enforcement strategies.

Proponents argue that this approach will fill a critical gap in current enforcement efforts. Justin Kean, a supporter of the Mississippi bill, describes it as “a neighborhood watch sort of gap for people that deal with criminals on a day-to-day basis.”

Legislative Details and Implications

Missouri’s SB 72 introduces the offense of “trespass by an illegal alien,” making it a felony for illegal aliens to knowingly enter and remain in the state. The bill also establishes the “Missouri Illegal Alien Certified Bounty Hunter Program” and a corresponding fund to support its operations.

Mississippi’s HB 1484, dubbed the “Mississippi Illegal Aliens Certified Bounty Hunter Program,” proposes a similar structure. Both bills offer a $1,000 reward for each successful apprehension and deportation of a criminal illegal alien.

Controversy and Constitutional Considerations

Critics of the proposed legislation express concerns about potential civil rights violations and the risk of racial profiling. They argue that the financial incentives could lead to overzealous enforcement and erode trust between law enforcement and immigrant communities.

Supporters, however, point to the 2011 Supreme Court decision in Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting, which upholds state immigration measures that complement federal goals. They argue that the bounty hunter program is a legitimate exercise of state authority in the face of perceived federal inaction.

Sources: