by Richard Greenberg, Associate Editor

Legislation enacted last month in two Northern Virginia counties that targets illegal immigrants has generated vociferous opposition, impassioned support and ambivalence as well.

Among the opponents are several Jewish organizations, although none of them had spoken out publicly until they were contacted last week by WJW and asked for comment.

The first of the two controversial measures was unanimously adopted July 10 by the Prince William County Board of Supervisors before an emotionally charged overflow crowd. The resolution limits illegal immigrants' access to public services and bolsters immigration enforcement by police.

A similar resolution was passed unanimously a week later by the Loudoun County Board of Supervisors. Both measures were adopted following the failure of Congress to pass comprehensive immigration reform in June.

In each case, according to proponents, the local legislation was a reasoned response to crime, overcrowding and the failure of immigrants to assimilate. Detractors, meanwhile, characterized the measures as short-sighted, fear-based and xenophobic.

"It's a very complex issue," said Lorraine Davis, president of Conservative Congregation Sha'are Shalom in Leesburg, located in Loudoun County. "We have mixed feelings in our congregation. There is compassion for the individual and concern about legal status. One woman I know has helped people become legal citizens and others are concerned about overcrowding."

One Sha'are Shalom congregant who supports the Loudoun County legislation is Ken Reid, a member of the Leesburg Town Council and the owner of a local publishing company.

Reid, a former liberal Democrat-turned Republican, said he is concerned primarily with safety problems stemming from immigrant-related residential overcrowding and with the exploitation of illegal immigrants who are often paid under the table by contractors and then send the money to their country of origin. That arrangement, he said, is a disincentive for them to settle here and become U.S. citizens.

The Loudoun County resolution which is preliminary in nature and apparently paves the way for the adoption of concrete policies after further study in the fall is neither xenophobic nor racist, according to Reid. Opposition to the measure, he said, is largely "knee-jerk liberal reaction" from those who find that a contrarian position in this case "suits their political agenda."

Not surprisingly, a progressive Jewish blog known as J Voices had a completely different take on the doings in Northern Virginia. In a message posted shortly after the Prince William legislation was adopted, J Voices stated: "If you weren't doing anything about immigrant rights before, this should raise an alarm or two, nu?"

The J Voices founder and editor is a Cole Krawitz, who identifies himself in the blog as a writer, poet and activist who lived in Brooklyn, N.Y., before recently relocating to California.

Although they had yet to issue official pronouncements, most regional Jewish organizations contacted opposed both Northern Virginia resolutions.

Spokespersons for those organizations offered various reasons for that less-than-proactive approach, including staffing shortages, a focus on state-level legislation rather than local, and the absence of some internal decision-makers during summer vacation season.

However, Jonathan Sarna, a professor of American Jewish history at Brandeis University, said another factor may be involved. According to Sarna, liberal immigration reform has been slipping off the Jewish radar screen for decades, in part, because "there are no longer large communities of persecuted Jews" that are trying to gain entry into the United States. The issue has also lost its priority status because it is now linked with issues of illegality and terrorism, Sarna added.

Hadar Susskind, Washington director of the Jewish Council for Public Affairs, a national umbrella organization, disputed that. "With all due respect, I would disagree with professor Sarna's assessment," said Susskind. "Immigration remains a top-tier issue for the Jewish community."

As evidence, Susskind noted that several Jewish organizations were deeply involved in the debate over federal immigration reform and are now signing onto federal bills dealing with the same issue.

As a national organization, the JCPA defers on local issues to the Jewish Community Relations Council of Greater Washington, which also had not issued an official statement regarding the Northern Virginia resolutions.

"We chose our battles, and we've had good impact at the state level, and maybe we wouldn't have the same impact locally," said Debra Linick, JCRC's assistant director for Northern Virginia and the District. During an interview, however, she said the local resolutions in question seem to exemplify "xenophobic attacks" against immigrants.

When contacted initially, Mark Pelavin, associate director of the District-based Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, said he was unaware of the Northern Virginia legislation. He was then unavailable for comment.

During a subsequent interview, Rabbi Scott Sperling, director of the Mid-Atlantic Council of the Union for Reform Judaism, said: "I can absolutely understand the overwhelming sense of frustration on the part of state and local government officials to the inability of Congress to pass comprehensive immigration reform. That said, these two pieces of legislation are going in the wrong direction. They are going to create a climate of fear and they are not going to accomplish their intended results. In the meantime, they are going to make the lives of certain individuals even more fraught with anxiety."

Sperling, like most other respondents, said immigration-related problems are best solved through comprehensive federal legislation rather than local measures, which he termed "neither efficient nor moral."

Sperling also disagreed with Sarna's assessment regarding Jewish involvement in liberal immigration reform. Although conceding that some denominations have taken a more conservative approach, Sperling said "we are still passionate in our advocacy."

A spokesperson for the Washington-area branch of the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society said she was concerned that local laws targeting immigrants might lead to hate crimes. HIAS' Candice Knezevic said an "alarming number" of such measures have been enacted during the past few years, "and they tend to err on the side of making life more difficult for immigrants."

Although many of those laws are being challenged in court, Knezevic added, they are likely to proliferate at an even greater rate in the absence of federal immigration reform. "We're going to have to be more involved in politics at the local level," she said. "We're going to have to shift our focus to the grassroots level so we can beat back these local ordinances. We have to really educate people because there's so much misinformation about immigrants and their effect on the United States."

HIAS had yet to take an official position on the Northern Virginia legislation mainly because of compassion fatigue, according to Knezevic. "We worked so hard to pass comprehensive immigration reform, and when it failed, we were frustrated and had to take a breather," she explained.

However, a statement subsequently issued by the HIAS national office which lauded last Thursday's federal court ruling striking down an immigrant-related ordinance in Hazelton, Pa. said measures such as those enacted in Prince William and Loudoun counties "will not improve our communities, but instead tear them apart."

Melanie Maron, executive director of the American Jewish Committee's Washington chapter, said her organization also favors federal legislation rather than a "piecemeal" local approach. "A lot of these local bills improperly target a specific group of people, and they have a mean-spiritedness that we do not support," added Maron, who said the AJCommittee does not always take an official position on local issues.

Likewise, Richard Lederman, executive director of the Seaboard Region of the United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism, said he didn't think the Prince William County legislation was "humane." (Speaking from Israel, he said he hadn't had a chance to study the Loudoun County measure.)

"We're not set up to monitor local affairs that way," he said. "Unfortunately, our social action agenda is limited. I have no staff."

David Friedman, executive director of the Anti-Defamation League's Washington regional office, said last week that he expects his office to issue a statement opposing the Northern Virginia legislation once a critical mass of decision-makers is able to gather.

John Riehl, Chesapeake regional president of the Jewish Reconstructionist Federation, emphasized that the RCF has long supported immigrant rights. But he said he was not familiar enough with the local resolutions to comment on them.