the tendency to just post bills that have been introduced without context is frustrating; actual reporting on the subject makes it clear this is not going to pass and even other Republican lawmakers are deeply skeptical of its legality and constitutionality (because it’s neither):

House Rep. Jansen Owen, R-Poplarville, vice chairman of the Judiciary B committee (one of two House committees that the bill has been referred to), expressed deep skepticism about Keen’s bill.

“I’m concerned about the constitutionality of some of those provisions,” he told the Mississippi Free Press on Jan. 24.

The Republican lawmaker explained that he had not personally reviewed the bill, but he stressed that determining the legality of immigrants was above the jurisdiction of the state to begin with.

“That’s within the purview of the federal government,” he said, adding he supports local law enforcement referring detainees to federal immigration services. But “the state doesn’t need to get in the business of enforcing federal immigration law,” he concluded.

this is to say nothing of bounty hunters, who would actually enforce the law and have not been consulted on this bill because it’s not serious. the primary value of the bill is earned media stochastic terrorism, which is aided by posting it without this context. (this is an issue with trans-related bills too and has been for years.) please don’t aid in that–contextualizing this stuff is especially important now that organizations and people might need to triage their battles.