INDIANAPOLIS - The original version of the three-strikes immigration bill was resurrected Tuesday in the state Senate, a day after House Democrats blocked Republican changes to the legislation.
As originally passed by the Republican-controlled Senate last month, Senate Bill 335 would have imposed criminal penalties on those who conceal or transport illegal aliens. An employer who knowingly employed illegal aliens three times in 10 years could be brought to court and lose his license to operate a business in Indiana under the original bill.
That wording was changed in the Democrat-controlled House, however, leading Republicans in that chamber to complain the bill had been weakened. They walked out of the House on Thursday in protest.
Meanwhile, back in the Senate, the author of the immigration bill, Sen. Mike Delph, R-Carmel, found a procedural way to revive his original wording. Tuesday on the Senate floor, Delph offered an amendment to cut and paste his original wording onto a separate bill dealing with unemployment insurance, House Bill 1219.
Senate Democrats opposed that. Delph's amendment passed, 28 to 16.
The bill now is eligible for a third reading vote in the Senate. If it passes there, it would go back to the House.
"I'm just trying to keep as many vehicles alive with the illegal immigration bill," Delph said of his parliamentary maneuver.
The House was scheduled to vote this week on its amended version of the immigration bill, now labeled Senate Bill 345. The House had removed the original criminal penalties, and rather than local prosecutors bringing cases in local courts against employers as Delph had proposed, immigration violations would be decided by the state Department of Labor in administrative hearings.
Delph believes if the House passes its version of the legislation, "that will show the state of Indiana that both chambers (of the Legislature) support a tough bill on illegal immigration."
Passage of both versions by the Senate and House would trigger conference-committee negotiations to hammer out a compromise, but Delph noted there is significant overlap between the two bills.