Departments against immigration law: can they really oppose it?

Departments against immigration law can they really oppose it

Barely passed, the immigration law is already causing a stir in the world of local authorities. In a press release published Wednesday, December 20, 32 left-wing departments announced their refusal to apply the tightening of the conditions for payment to foreigners of the Personalized Autonomy Allowance (APA) provided for by the new law. This now imposes a waiting period of five years for foreigners in a legal situation who do not work, and of thirty months for others to benefit from the aid.

“We, Presidents of Left-wing Departments, consider that this law is a serious attack on the fundamental rights of people of foreign nationality, in addition to being contrary to the values ​​of the Republic and the humanist values ​​that we defend,” they said. writing.

On And to specify: “All the inhabitants of Seine-Saint-Denis deserve solidarity and humanity, wherever they come from.”

For her part, Anne Hidalgo, confirmed on her WhatsApp channel that the Paris town hall will continue to apply “the rights and constitutional principles of our country” and will not “practice national preference”, deeming the immigration law “shameful” . As for the socialist mayor of Lille, Martine Aubry, she guaranteed that her city “will remain a land of hospitality and solidarity” and that it will continue “to welcome and support everyone in our territory, whatever their origin”.

The law applies to everyone

On CNews and Europe 1, the Minister of the Economy and Finance, Bruno Le Maire, criticized this Thursday morning the rebellion of these departments. “The law imposes itself on everyone, especially when you are elected by the French people,” he declared. And to continue: it’s “very nice to put your hand on your heart, to say ‘I’m going to oppose’, but there is a democracy […] It is good that everyone respects the decisions of popular sovereignty, especially elected officials.”

If in fact the law imposes itself on everyone under the 1958 Constitution, Benjamin Morel, lecturer in public law at the University of Paris 2 Panthéon-Assas interviewed by L’Express, believes that Emmanuel Macron is a victim of “watered sprinkler syndrome”. “In his 2018 constitutional reform project, the President of the Republic had precisely proposed to local authorities a ‘right to differentiation’ and therefore the possibility of derogating from certain laws. The fact of affirming today that we must submit to the law whatever it may be, is therefore a bit contradictory and annoys the departments…”.

“Palliatives” imagined by the departments

Some communities have started to imagine solutions to protect their citizens despite the law. The creation of a new autonomy allowance – based on the model of that which already exists – for beneficiaries excluded by law is therefore envisaged. “This represents a cost for the department but we assume it in view of the shameful provisions of this text”, indicates the entourage of the president of Lot, Serge Rigal, in the columns of the Figaro. “The departmental council can a priori take this initiative by drawing from its budget. This does not constitute a circumvention of the law but a palliative so that its effects on those administered are less,” underlines Benjamin Morel.

And added: “nothing is yet set in stone regarding immigration law.” He recalls in fact that the Constitutional Council was contacted by the executive to “rule on the conformity of all or part of this law”. In this case, the point concerning the payment of the personalized autonomy allowance is likely to be challenged if it is deemed contrary to fundamental rights by the Elders.

“Laxity” and “blindness” denounced by Le Maire

Asked about the criticisms of left-wing figures like François Hollande or the mayor of Paris Anne Hidalgo, Bruno Le Maire saw in their positions on immigration not “humanity”, but “laxity”, “laxity”, blindness” and “unconsciousness”. For him, “all these people are responsible for the rise of the National Rally”.

He welcomed an “indispensable text to protect the French”, judging that “the majority has been impeccable in their support and determination”. Concerning the Renaissance deputies who voted against the text or abstained, he considered “that we attach a lot of importance to the minority positions of some in the majority”. Bruno Le Maire also said he supports “100%” the text in which he does not see “a national preference”, even if for him the obligation of deposit requested from foreign students “was not the most essential” of the measures .



lep-life-health-03