RALEIGH – If there remained any lingering doubt that illegal immigration was a significant issue in North Carolina politics, the month of July should have dispelled it. The issue made headlines numerous times even as new research suggested that for the first time in years, the number of illegal immigrants is going down.

There’s no contradiction. The two trends are linked.

Patterns as complex as immigration flows will always resist simple classification or easy explanation. America’s weakened economy has surely played a role in reducing the demand for immigrant labor. But a study from the restrictionist Center for Immigration Studies persuasively argues that the immigration flow turned negative before job-creation did, making it likely that tougher enforcement efforts by federal, state, and local authorities are discouraging some foreigners from crossing the border illegally and encouraging current illegal aliens to “self-deport.” Since last summer, when a bipartisan comprehensive-reform bill was defeated by a bipartisan opposition, it appears that the illegal-alien population has declined by 11 percent, or some 1.3 million people.

In North Carolina, tighter government policies have clearly made it less attractive to reside here without proper documentation. It’s harder to obtain a driver’s license or ID card. Some businesses employing workers illegally have been raided. Many illegal residents have probably heard the passionate debate about admission and tuition policies in the University of North Carolina and community-college systems. Many probably also know that North Carolina counties are beginning to participate in the 287(g) program that taps federal resources to help deport illegal aliens accused of violating other laws.

It all adds up to a widespread perception that illegal immigration isn’t being tolerated as much as in the past. The perception is accurate, though the risk of any particular immigrant running afoul of enforcement agencies is exaggerated.

If current trends continue, the illegal-alien population in North Carolina and the rest of the country could drop by as much as half in just the next five years. This result will delight groups such as the Center for Immigration Studies – who really just oppose any immigration, legal or illegal – as well as a smaller but vocal number of kooks and bigots whose beef is more with the surnames and skin tones of the immigrants than with their legal status or employment prospects.

For their part, radical leftists and professional grievance machines such as the National Council of La Raza will express outrage, making spurious comparisons between immigration enforcement and totalitarianism – an obnoxious charge that trivializes the crimes of 20th century fascism and communism.

To the rest of us, who debate public policies in good faith and see no contradiction between welcoming more legal immigrants and maintaining the rule of law, the “self-deportation” trend of the past year offers hope for a solution. During the 2007 debate in Washington, it became obvious that public opinion strongly opposed any comprehensive legislation that married increased enforcement with guest-worker programs or more pathways to citizenship. Based on past experience, voters had a reasonable skepticism that government would follow through on any pledge to enforce immigration laws, so they saw reform as little more than a stamp of approval for past lawbreaking.

The legislation stalled. In the meantime, however, policymakers have responded to public pressure with enforcement measures. Respecting federal law and court decisions giving illegal residents access to emergency services, and their children access to public education (minors shouldn’t be held responsible for the poor choices of their parents), many governments nevertheless resolved not to mollycoddle illegal residents.

As the out-migration continues, the pressure that rapid immigration has placed on public health, school construction, and other government services will subside. Citizens will no longer feel as though their legitimate concerns are being ignored, and may look at future reform efforts with more favor. This is certainly a more likely scenario for finding a long-term solution to the problem than the political train wreck we saw in Congress last year.

Illustrating their political clumsiness and ideological blinders, however, immigration activists in North Carolina spent much of July actively trying to destroy this scenario. When 287(g) enforcement efforts in Alamance County yielded some examples of poor judgment – the officer who didn’t make adequate arrangements for the care of children left by the roadside when their mother was arrested, for example – the activists thought they could use the case to quash the enforcement effort as a whole. When many North Carolinians responded by attributing much of the responsibility to the mother, for putting her children at risk, the activists seemed puzzled.

Then they seized upon Attorney General Roy Cooper’s reversal of a previous legal opinion to argue for immediate action to admit illegal residents into degree programs at state colleges. The activists again seemed not to understand how such policies, by signaling contempt for the immigration laws of the country, destroy any chance that the public will ever countenance reform – in part because the public knows full well that admission today at out-of-state tuition rates would benefit so few low-income immigrants that it would inevitably lead to calls for in-state tuition (read: massive taxpayer subsidies).

If voters think legalizing immigration will cost them money, they’ll oppose it. Is that so hard to understand?

As I’ve said many times before, among the groups working against the interests of would-be legal immigrants to America are the very lobbies and advocacy groups that profess to speak for them. These activists desperately need a dose of common sense.

Hood is president of the John Locke Foundation.