In Charlotte, N.C., right now, outside a Perry fundraiser at San Antonio’s Modern Mexican restaurant, the Americans for Legal Immigration PAC is mounting an afternoon protest “designed to forewarn the 81% of Americans found in numerous polls to oppose in-state tuition for illegal aliens about Rick Perry’s unpopular support for illegal immigrants.”

The group announced Thursday that the protest was just one in a nationwide series, designed to tell the world that Perry, in the words of ALIPAC President William Gheen, supports the “illegal immigration invasion of America.”

“Close examination of Rick Perry shows a man that wants to appear to be tough on illegal immigration while in truth he is supporting the illegal immigration invasion of America,” said William Gheen. “Our protest today and the coming protests across the nation are designed to warn voters about Rick Perry’s real positions on illegal immigration before it is too late.”

The group got even more publicity than it bargained for earlier this week, when Americans for Rick Perry’s social media director Clint Cox flagged a Facebook post on the ALIPAC protest to have it removed, the latest awkward attempt from the governor’s camp to avoid negative social media mentions. ALIPAC seized on the mini-scandal.

This flap over the 2001 law granting in-state tuition to undocumented immigrants has also offered a taller soapbox to tea party groups in Texas that have been asking Perry to bring the Texas Legislature back to harshen up the state’s immigration laws.

It’s a drumbeat they’ve kept up since just after the last legislative session ended, but on Thursday Politico’s Reid Epstein called it “a new front” for Perry’s immigration defense, with the groups’ plans to offer yet another call for a special immigration session of the Legislature. As Dallas-area tea party leader Katrina Pierson suggested to Politico, it’d be a chance for Perry to “clarify his position on illegal immigration.”

“If he can’t get the job done in Texas with a supermajority, with something that he says is a priority, how is he going to get that done in D.C.?” Pierson said. “You have control of everything in Texas, and you still can’t it done. He doesn’t want to get it done.

House Speaker: If the House flips to a GOP majority, current Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) will have to turn over her title to current Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio). Handing the reins to Boehner could be a huge blow to the odds of comprehensive immigration reform, or any bill that would allow some of the undocumented immigrants in the country to earn legal status. Boehner expressed doubt earlier this year that Democrats could pass immigration reform — he was right — and said he favors a border security-first approach. The GOP’s Pledge to America, which was unveiled in September, has few details on immigration-related issues, but mostly focused on enforcement and border issues rather than changes to the legal immigration system.

Immigration subcommittee: The House immigration subcommittee would be chaired by Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) instead of Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.) if Republicans took control of the House. On immigration, it would be hard for any two House members’ positions to be more different: King favors a number of anti-illegal immigration crackdowns and interrogation of immigration enforcement officials, while Lofgren focused her efforts on reform to make legal immigration more efficient. If King heads the subcommittee, he has promised to try to pass a birthright citizenship repeal bill, a bill punishing employers of illegal immigrants, a crackdown on so-called “sanctuary cities” and legislation that would assert states have the right to create immigration laws like Arizona’s SB 1070.

Other immigration-related races: More broadly, the election could see a number of advocates of comprehensive immigration reform replaced by immigration hardliner opponents. In Colorado, Rep. John Salazar (D) is trailing Republican Scott Tipton in the polls. Salazar supports enhanced border security measures as part of a comprehensive immigration reform bill, but voted against building a fence along the U.S.-Mexico border. Tipton opposes “amnesty,” the general Republican term for paths to legalization for illegal immigrants already in the country.

Four of Arizona’s five incumbent Democratic representatives could lose their seats to Republicans, which would make a splash because of the state’s importance on immigration and border issue. Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.), who easily won previous elections in his heavily Democratic district, faces strong competition from Republican Ruth McClung. Grijalva is a strong supporter of immigration reform and Latino and immigrant rights. He drew fire for his staunch opposition to SB 1070 after he called for a boycott on his state — which he has since said was a misstep.

Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) is facing Republican Jesse Kellly, who has been criticized for accepting an endorsement from Americans for Legal Immigration PAC, or ALIPAC. Giffords is a supporter of border enforcement before other immigration reform, but Kelly is much further to the right: He says the government should construct a double-layer border fence, hire more Border Patrol agents and deploy 10,000 National Guard troops.

Of course, freshman members usually don’t have that much influence, but these potential members would likely have the support of Reps. Lamar Smith (R-Texas) and Steve King (R-Iowa), who will head committees that manage immigration if the House flips today. I’ll have a few posts later today on some of the major races that could influence immigration issues, but it’s worth looking at some of the probable freshman GOP members as well.

Here are a few possible Republican winners, plus the bills they have pushed for in their home towns and states and some of their priorities if they win today:

Lou Barletta: Barletta is the mayor of Hazleton, Pa., which passed a law cracking down on employers and landlords who hired or rented to illegal immigrants. A court overturned the law in September, finding it preempted federal immigration law. Still, Barletta may push for similar legislation on the national level if he wins today against Rep. Paul Kanjorski (D-Pa.). “We can convince others, if we’re going to deal with the deficit and the budget, you can’t exclude the illegal immigration problem out of that equation because it has a direct effect on the budget,” Barletta told Politico. “Not dealing with it would be like having a car with three wheels.”

Jeff Perry: Currently a Massachusetts state senator, Perry has attempted to block undocumented immigrants from receiving services funded by taxpayer money, such as public housing. His campaign site argues for a “comprehensive plan” to end illegal immigration: “Secure the border,” step up enforcement and crack down on employers who hire illegal immigrants. He also supports expanding E-Verify, a program that verifies the immigration status of potential employees, and creating legislation to block social services from illegal immigrants nationwide. Perry is running for an open seat against Democratic candidate William Keating.

Martha Roby: On the Montgomery, Ala., city council, Roby passed an ordinance penalizing businesses that employ undocumented workers. She has argued in support of Arizona’s SB 1070, the controversial immigration law the Justice Department sued the state to stop, and says the government must do more to prevent illegal immigrants from crossing the border and finding jobs in the United States. Roby could win the seat of Rep. Bobby Bright (D-Ala.).

Sandy Adams: Adams has pushed as a Florida state representative to stop certain immigrant-friendly practices, such as in-state tuition to undocumented students who attended high school in the state. She has also tried to pass legislation preventing illegal immigrants from receiving driver’s licenses. Adams touts her endorsement from Americans for Legal Immigration PAC, or ALIPAC — a group that has fought back against charges that it is tied to Nazism and white supremacist groups — and claims the government should increase enforcement of illegal immigration. Adams is running against incumbent Rep. Suzanne Kosmas (D-Fla.).

For the most part, these legislative efforts are the standard Republican fare on immigration. Most of these candidates hope to push for more enforcement along the border — which was already bolstered by additional troops and funding. They also could come up against significant pushback on attempts to increase immigration enforcement within the United States. The Obama administration has deported record numbers of illegal immigrants, and Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials have chosen to adjust their enforcement priorities rather than requesting more funds to police immigration.

Although border security, especially, has become a major campaign talking point, these potential freshman members might also come up against a lack of support from the GOP leadership. King and Smith failed in their effort to include specific immigration-related plans in the GOP’s Pledge to America, which was meant to be a summary of how a Republican-led House would lead on a number of issues. The actual immigration content in the pledge is vague and unclear on what type of immigration legislation would be a priority for the leadership.

Allegations of voter fraud are mostly baseless, but they still get plenty of attention. Arizona Secretary of State Ken Bennett said last week that there was no proof of widespread or systematic voter fraud. At issue, apparently, was the large number of voter registrations by Mi Familia Vota, a national organization that encourages Latinos to vote. But the group did not submit fraudulent registration forms — an Arizona TV station reported some requests for early voting were rejected, but only because the applicants were already registered to vote early.

ALIPAC President William Gheen is not convinced. “Democrats are trying to limit their losses on Election Day by cheating and encouraging illegal aliens to vote in the 2010 elections, which by the way is a felony!” he wrote on the group’s website.

That claim was picked up and legitimated by Fox & Friends, as Wonk Room pointed out today:

CARLSON: Just in time for the election, the Justice Department is sending election observers to the state. You ask why? Well, they say they are worried that there may be some sort of discrimination going on against Hispanic voters. But, William Gheen, said he knows exactly why they’re coming. Here’s what he says: [...] [Reads quote.] That’s quite an accusation coming from that particular group.

KILMEADE: So in his mind they’re sending out observers to turn their back, to allow people to vote in elections where they don’t belong in.

DOOCY: They’re looking for volunteers to do some patrolling, essentially recruiting them to block illegals from voting. See that’s the problem. They say “illegals should not be voting,” but it’s relatively easy in a number of states for illegals to vote. Particularly in Arizona. All you gotta do is show a water bill, a heat bill, you got a library card, a driver’s license, all stuff you can get if you are in this country illegally. So, that’s why they’re doing that and Hispanic groups are steamed.

There are several major problems with this. First off, it’s untrue: Arizona requires voters to have a government-issued ID, which illegal immigrants cannot receive in Arizona because they cannot be issued driver’s licenses.

But beyond that, the idea of widespread efforts by undocumented immigrants to vote could easily lead to voter intimidation. Ban Amnesty Now, an anti-illegal immigration group, sent out an email signed by Maricopa County, Ariz., Sheriff Joe Arpaio asking volunteers to man the polls to watch for illegal immigrants trying to vote. Arpaio said he did not give the group permission to send the email in his name and cut his ties to the group, of which he was previously co-chairman. In Texas, the King Street Patriots have been accused of hovering over voters, particularly minorities, while observing at the polls.

These groups are theoretically only trying to prevent illegal immigrants from voting, but progressive groups say they could keep Latinos and other minorities from voting. Latino voters could have a major impact on a number of races but have been targeted by ads that urge them not to vote.

America’s Voice, a pro-immigration reform group, has a Protect Our Vote initiative for Latinos and other minorities to report vote suppression efforts. The Department of Justice has also stepped in by announcing it will deploy more than 400 observers to 30 jurisdictions — including Maricopa County — on Tuesday.

Even after the election, claims of fraudulent voting by illegal immigrants could remain in play. Some conservative politicians have promised to push for laws at the state level to require proof of citizenship to register to vote, even though a similar law was struck down in Arizona last week.

This could be bad news for McIntyre, who referred to his ALIPAC endorsement to claim he is tougher on immigration than his opponent, Ilario Pantano. But some candidates might not want to be endorsed by ALIPAC anyway. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee launched an attack last week on Republican congressional candidate Jesse Kelly for his ALIPAC endorsement, claiming the group has “known white supremacist, anti-Semitic and neo-Nazi ties.” (ALIPAC leaders say the claim is baseless.)

ALIPAC mostly endorses Republicans, but selected a few Blue Dog Democrats — all incumbents — with pro-enforcement views for endorsements. But the group determined Pantano and Austin Scott, the Republican hoping to win Marshall’s seat, were more likely to vote against Democratic initiatives on immigration.

“We believe that our endorsements are better aligned with Ilario Pantano and Austin Scott against these incumbents who have refused to take action against cities that harbor illegal aliens,” William Gheen, ALIPAC president, said in a press release. “We also want to strongly rebuke the Democratic leadership this year because Obama, Pelosi, and Reid are actively promising amnesty to illegal aliens, while some Democratic campaigns are deploying illegals as election canvassers.”

The group favors crackdowns on so-called “sanctuary cities” that have laws preventing local police from checking people’s immigration status except in certain instances. It also advocates harsher immigration enforcement and opposes a path to legalization for undocumented immigrants already in the country — “amnesty,” in the conservative vernacular.

ALIPAC denies having any ties to white supremacists, Nazism or anti-Semitism. “This attack comes while there is zero evidence that ALIPAC or any officers of ALIPAC have ever sought or intentionally received any support from such groups!” the group wrote in an email to its supporters today.

Kelly’s campaign isn’t happy with the characterization either. “There is a special place in hell for those who would slander combat veterans who would have gladly been mutilated, subjected to chemical weapons and killed in defense of our freedom,” Kelly campaign manager Adam Kwasman told Politico.

As Republican candidates often sough to prove their conservative values during primaries, endorsements from ALIPAC were doled out only to candidates considered toughest on illegal immigration. But the group backs some Democrats as well, although all are incumbents and most are Blue Dogs: Reps. Jim Marshall (D-Ga.), John Barrow (D-Ga.), Joe Donnelly (D-Ind.), Gene Taylor (D-Miss.), Mike McIntyre (D-N.C.) and Pete DeFazio (D-Ore.).

Here’s part of their press release:

ALIPAC is asking Immigration and Customs Enforcement to arrest and charge both Whitman and Diaz for numerous immigration and employment law violations. [...]

Americans curious about Meg Whitman’s support for Comprehensive Immigration Reform Amnesty (CIRA) that would lift current laws and penalties for both illegal aliens and their employers now know why. If CIRA were to pass, exploitative employers like Whitman would escape the existing penalties under US law which have a nine year statute of limitations.

The American public has indicated in numerous scientific polls that well over 80% of Americans want employers like Meg Whitman heavily fined. Over 50% want the employers of illegals, like Whitman, jailed.

ALIPAC isn’t putting all the blame on Whitman: they mocked her former housekeeper for crying during a press conference yesterday and said she should also be arrested.

Whitman isn’t the most popular California candidate among the anti-illegal immigration set, particularly after she softened her immigration rhetoric to appeal to Latino voters. But although she has been less gung-ho about harsh enforcement measures such as Arizona’s SB 1070 immigration law, NumbersUSA, which pushes for lower immigration numbers, lists Whitman as supportive of barring driver’s licenses for illegal immigrants and taking away funding from “sanctuary cities.” Both, it should be noted, are issues that rights groups say are more about public safety than enforcement.

But the “true reformer” in the race, for Californians who want tough immigration enforcement, is Tea Party candidate Chelene Nightingale, according to NumbersUSA. Nightingale won over Tea Partiers (and not much of anyone else) with hard-line stances against “anchor babies” and government services for illegal immigrants.

Still, it’s worth noting that Whitman could face conservative backlash with her past employment of an undocumented worker. While Latinos may turn on her for her for allegedly mistreating an employee, the ire of ALIPAC shows conservatives won’t take kindly to the story either.

ALIPAC’s strategy to help defend Arizona from intensive attacks from the nation of Mexico and the Obama administration has been to spread the law to other states to illustrate the popularity and wisdom of the legislation.

“Our ALIPAC activists have been working hard contacting state lawmakers in every state in America asking them to stand up with Arizona,” said William Gheen, President of ALIPAC. “We are very pleased to announce that 22 states are now following Arizona’s lead to pass versions of a law that has the support of 60-81% percent of Americans according to the polls.”

ALIPAC lobbies for anti-illegal immigration legislation in state and local governments. The group calls itself non-partisan, but its endorsement list is pretty one-sided: Of 102 endorsements,  only five are for Democrats. (Four of the five are Blue Dogs.) They also endorsed J.D. Hayworth over Sen. John McCain in the Republican primary in Arizona — and caused him some problems when offensive anti-immigrant language appeared on their site and McCain called for Hayworth to disavow the group.

But it’s unclear what level of credit can be given to ALIPAC for the copycat immigration bills — after all, a majority of Americans support the way Arizona chose to address illegal immigration.

Tea Parties Against Amnesty announced in March that they would organize rallies across the country, April 15-17, to show their opposition to any proposed legislation for comprehensive immigration reform.

Americans for Legal Immigration PAC (ALIPAC), an anti-illegal immigration group, today made an announcement to supporters defending the Tea Party against accusations of racism and applauding the upcoming rallies.

A massive amount of new support is rushing into our operations. We have never seen this many new people sign up in our five year history. We want to give a special welcome to all of the new folks who have joined our email alert lists and taken interest of our Tea Party Against Amnesty events April 15-17…

Some of our diverse ALIPAC supporters are not fans of the Tea Party movement, however, they understand that 90% of Tea Party supporters oppose illegal immigration and amnesty with us. Most understand that we need broad coalitions to stop amnesty and reverse illegal immigration.

Some, unfortunately, are buying into the massive negative propaganda assault on the Tea Party movement. All we will say about that right now is that the Tea Party folks are not violent and not racist. They are being attacked in the same way our Border Security Movement has been attacked. They are being attacked because the powers that favor elite rule in America want to stop and divert the political revolution that is growing in America today.

If anyone reading this has any doubts about the Tea Party movement, you should stop listening to CNN and MSNBC and actually go to one of these events and talk with the people there to understand the realities vs. the propaganda.

ALIPAC is proud to stand with other Americans who share our cause of border security and enforcement of our immigration laws, and we will stand up against those who want to assault free speech and freedom of assembly for Americans.

There are currently 52 protest events posted on AgainstAmnesty.com, with 9,482 protest supporters signed up. The rallies will include some well-known Tea Party and anti-immigration speakers, including former Rep. Tom Tancredo, the outspoken founder and co-chairman of border security, anti-immigration PAC Team America; J.D. Hayworth, John McCain’s Republican opponent for U.S. senate; Arizona’s controversial sheriff, Joe Arpaio; and ALIPAC President William Gheen.

“While Mr. Dobbs claims his positions have not changed, however, that is not the perception of many of our mutual supporters,” said William Gheen of ALIPAC, in a press release. “His recent comments on Telemundo and his national radio show supporting some kind of path to citizenship for illegal immigrants is inconsistent with positions of ALIPAC and the views of most American citizens.”

ALIPAC is a stalwart opponent of what it and Dobbs have long derisively called “amnesty” for illegal immigrants. The PAC cites a recent Pulse Opinion Research poll finding that “78% of likely voters were opposed to legalizing the status of the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in the U.S., with only 19% supporting it.”

No lawmakers are actually proposing legalizing all 12 million illegal immigrants in the United States, but some have proposed creating a path to legalization for those who have lived and worked in the United States for several years, have not broken any criminal laws and are willing to pay back taxes and a fine.

Dobbs recently fueled speculation that he may run for political office when he appeared on Telemundo and said he would support legalization for some undocumented immigrants. He also floated the possibility during an appearance on former Sen. Fred Thompson’s (R-Tenn.) radio show.

“Our internal polling shows that over 70% of our supporters are upset with Mr. Dobbs’s comments on Telemundo is support of legalizing illegal aliens. ALIPAC opposes any path to citizenship form of Amnesty for illegal aliens currently in the US,” said Gheen.

“Therefore we are dropping our support for Lou Dobbs and suspending the fan sites we have created.”