Attendance is not prohibited for such students; school districts are mandated to submit annual tallies on the suspected number of illegal immigrants when making report to state education officials.
[8] After the U.S. Department of Justice and a coalition of groups including the ACLU appealed that ruling, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals on October 14, 2011, again put several key provisions on hold until the issues of constitutionality could be addressed, including the requirement on schools to collect information on enrolling students' immigration status.
[4] In a further December 12, 2011, ruling, Thompson attacked the history behind the law, describing the legislative debate as having been "laced with derogatory comments about Hispanics."
He said it was likely that the entire law was "discriminatorily based" and that lawmakers employed ethnic stereotypes and used the terms "Hispanic" and "illegal immigrant" interchangeably.
He accused State Representative Hammon of having misused a news article to justify a claim that Alabama was home to the second fastest growing population of undocumented immigrants in the nation.
[16] On December 2, 2011, a Japanese Honda executive was stopped in Leeds, Alabama, at a checkpoint set up by police to catch unlicensed drivers.
[17] Ahmad Ijaz, Director of Economic Forecasting at the University of Alabama, found that the majority of job growth in 2011 was in the automotive sector – an area of the economy where undocumented workers were uncommon.
Contrary to expectation, there was no job growth in sectors where Latinos typically work – construction, agriculture, and poultry processing.
"[21] On December 5, 2011, Attorney General of Alabama Luther Strange recommended repealing several parts of the law: the provision requiring collection of the immigration status of public school students, the provision requiring immigrants to always carry alien registration cards, and the allowance of lawsuits by state citizens who do not believe public officials are enforcing the law.