"Arizona's flagship, the SB 1070, has veered wildly off-course -- following contact with aliens it is now on a collision course with the U.S.S. Constitution -- MayDay, MayDay, calling all ships at sea, burning up on reentry -- Ground Control, copy, the SB 1070 is going down, repeat, SB 1070 is going down..."
The notion of space constituting the "final frontier" is evocative of humankind's grandest aspirations. Dashing through the cosmos, exploring strange new worlds, seeking out new life forms, perhaps even discovering clues to our own origins and destinies -- the lure of this frontier is powerful. But it will have to wait a bit longer; for now, in our earthbound state, we have more mundane matters that require our energy and attention. Great heights await, yet today we are grounded by our own inability to get along.
In America's political and cultural spheres, it is all too apparent that the final frontier is race, not space. Putting aside for the moment Barack Obama's thus far disappointing tenure as President, it is beyond peradventure that his mere election has sparked a resurgence of race-based oppositional politics that is being felt across the nation. Surely other (and even crasser) motivations are at hand, but the unspoken impetus for much of the antipathy and rage we have seen of late has race issues lurking at the core.
I'm not going to recount these episodes here; they needn't be further reified or glorified at this point. Suffice to say that hate groups, both of the marginal and mainstream varieties, have had a recruiting field day during Obama's tenure, and the right side of the political spectrum has become obsessed with "race matters" as THE wedge issue to mobilize its base and denigrate its foes. This trend reaches levels of absurdity such as when Glenn Beck attempts to rebrand Martin Luther King, Jr. for his own nefarious purposes -- but it plays out in far more dangerous and tangible ways than Beck's hollow shenanigans.
Enter Arizona. The state has become the central battleground in the effort to institutionalize race hierarchies and socio-cultural divisions. Banning ethnic studies, dismissing teachers with accents, lightening dark-skinned mural faces, moving to abolish the pejoratively-named "anchor babies," and of course most notably the racial profiling law that is SB 1070. Cut through the blather and call it what it is: a "reasonable suspicion" of someone's immigration status here in the southwest is going to be based primarily on racial and ethnic factors. It doesn't matter how many times you amend the law or how many training videos police officers are made to watch -- everyone knows what it all means in reality.
And indeed, public officials here have used coded words and phrases to essentially admit as much. Illegal immigrants are variously described as "drug mules," "narco-terrorists," "welfare queens," "invading hordes," and scores of other racialized epithets. SB 1070's sponsor cavorts with supremacists and cheers when "illegals" flee the state due to his misguided machinations. The governor can barely get a sentence out that is not offensive in its false justifications for the law. Vigilantes take the cue and swarm to the border, while our very own "toughest sheriff" conducts a reign of terror on communities of color -- and unabashedly vows to escalate it in the days ahead if and when the law takes effect.
But it's not about race, they say. If you call SB 1070 a racist law, or imply that those who concocted it and stump for it are racists, the leading line of Fox-fed attacks will be to call YOU a racist. Arizona's cutting-edge dalliances with stirring up the "states' rights" hornets' nest are simply about "stepping in where the federal government has failed" and "upholding federal immigration law." Never mind that the feds don't actually want them to do this, or that the Constitution plainly vests exclusive authority to regulate immigration and conduct foreign policy in the federal government and not the states. Never mind that the "states' rights" mantra was invoked by the slaveholding states to justify their practices. Perhaps we should bring back the good old stability and prosperity of those halcyon days?
No, this has nothing to do with upholding federal law. SB 1070 goes far beyond this, requiring the state's police officers to take steps that are presently optional, and even making them liable if they don't. It further creates new levels of scrutiny and vulnerability for LEGAL immigrants, many of whom will be subjected to increased harassment and even potentially criminalized for simply supporting their family members. Someone please tell them it's not about race or ethnicity, okay? They are living it every day.
Laws serve a number of functions in society, with a primary purpose being the symbolic cultivation of societal norms. Another unstated aim is to implicitly reinforce economic and political inequalities, sometimes accomplished through the selective enforcement of laws primarily against certain groups. What is remarkable and disturbing about SB 1070 is that it does both, overtly and without remorse. Symbolically, it tells nonwhites that they are unwelcome and under a cloud of suspicion simply by virtue of being who they are. Tangibly, the law mandates selective enforcement against them given the realities of who is likely to be an illegal immigrant in the state, and thus places them in a second-class legal status that will negatively impact their ability to organize and fully participate in their communities.
Arizona is merely reflecting America's deeper divisions about race relations. The stain of history has never been fully resolved on these shores: there have been no reparations, no apologies, no "truth and reconciliation" proceedings, no postwar mediations. We face a serious challenge over race issues in this country -- and yet now we have an opportunity as well. The final frontier is much closer to home than we realize. Let's take one small step for all of humankind, boldly going where no one gets left behind.
Follow Randall Amster on Twitter: www.twitter.com/randallamster
CNN poll: Most back Arizona law but cite concerns about effects
Elton John slams musicians who boycott Arizona over immigration law, report says
LA's Arizona boycott over illegal immigration faces another exemption. Is the ...
Immigrant 'sanctuaries' rouse opponents' wrath
20000 illegal aliens through Harris County jail in two years
What Section 287(g) of immigration act really says
The GOP's Delicate Courtship of Latino Voters
Concert Tonight: Rage, Oberst Protest Arizona Immigration Policy
What I want to know is, why is anyone even talking about the rights of illegals? They don't qualify for civil protections because they are not part of our society, BY THEIR OWN CHOICE. They voluntarily forfeited any civil rights they might have been entitled to when they circumvented the system. There can't be a violation of what doesn't exist.
Furthermore, it has always been legal and expected, and often required departmental procedure, that a policeman who questions you for a possible violation of any law will require you to provide some proof of identification, no matter who you are, what color you are, or how you got here. Failure to produce said evidence is grounds for being held in jail pending verification of your identity and legal status, vis a vis outstanding want and warrants, if the officer in question has the slightest hint of suspicion about you. Why should being here illegally grant someone immunity from these requirements?
This whole tempest in a teapot is just another example of people actively seeking out the slightest excuse for throwing a publicity-seeking tantrum, regardless of lacking any basis in fact.
ALL ILLEGAL ALIENS, no matter where they come from, what language they speak, what color they are, who they are related to, or which university they ILLEGALLY attend, need to go back to their own countries. The federal government should be enforcing our immigration laws - but they aren't. This leaves states having to solve the problem SB1070 is AZ attempt to do so. ALL STATES should follow their example.
Not only does SB1070 address the ILLEGAL ALIENS it also provides for HEAVY fines for those who hire ILLEGALS.
1. Streamline processing of legal immigration requests.
2. Strictly enforce all laws dealing with illegal immigration.
We should not be penalizing those who follow the law, based on the actions of those who don't. Rather, we should immediately deport or imprison (as the law demands, depending on the situation) those who don't.
Get your visa, get your green card, and Welcome! Otherwise go home. Your not welcome.
"Why can't Arizona be as inhospitable as they wish to people who have entered or remain in the U.S. unlawfully?"
The media cut off that last word "unlawfully" - which showed their bias in all this. Judge Bolton must've read all this slandering of her response, making her appear "anti-immigrant".
AP & all the rest have almost guaranteed she will keep SB1070 and will make it as hard as possible for the Justice Department to appeal.
All those shrieking about the evils of this law & the "Nazi" state are clueless. Anyone who lives in Arizona knows its far less of a police state than neighboring California which rapes residents financially with an abusive CHP, outrageous DMV fees, restrictive city & county ordinances, etc. Arizona is free in comparison. In Arizona one is not pulled over for some bogus infraction "worn right tire" & the like. The police state in California drains money from the legal residents so they can support all the illegal hordes (yes, hordes) that now occupy more & more of the state & drain California's income with social services for *millions* of illegals.
SB1070 is here to stay & the other states will enact similar or tougher legislation. The days when the media, and irresponsible journalists, can paint open-borders and endless illegals flooding the nation as some sort of humanitarian victory for the "compassionate" are now officially over.
Combine this with the federal invitation to the states to increased involvement of illegal immigration control, Clinton's 287(g) addition to the Alien Registration Act of 1940, and the current administration's lawsuit against AZ does not appear to hold water and only serves to further demonstrate the incompetence of the administration.
I will carry my birth certificate when I am exiting my country to visit another country. But if and when I am in the country that I love and was born in, please do not, again, do not ask me to prove my citizenship.
God bless America and forgive Arizona.
Anyone has to reply, please do it without the name calling and sarcasm. Ignorance is not a virtue.
Then there's this:
"A law enforcement official or agency of this state or a county, city, town or other political subdivision of this state may not consider race, color or national origin in implementing the requirements of this subsection except to the extent permitted by the United States or Arizona Constitution."
And there's this:
"Sec. 11.
B. The terms of this act regarding immigration shall be construed to have the meanings given to them under federal immigration law.
C. This act shall be implemented in a manner consistent with federal laws regulating immigration, protecting the civil rights of all persons and respecting the privileges and immunities of United States citizens."
The law not only doesn't lead to profiling; it prohibits profiling.
As for 'othering' - the simple fact is that lawbreaking foreign nationals (of any race, color, religion, ethnicity, nationality, or height or weight) are others and they are supposed to be others, they are not citizens are not entitled to be here at all.
There's nothing race-based about the law at all; it applies equally to all lawbreaking foreign nationals who are dishonest enough to come here or stay here in violation of our laws.
I am not white but race has been unnecessarily dragged into this issue, and I don't think enforcing laws to protect borders and deport illegal immigrants is wrong. You may debate the criminality of these cases, but nevertheless if you dont want to enforce laws then why have a law in the first place?
Why doesn't America simply invite and provide for every single poor person of the planet here without process. Already the illegal alien Catholic Latinos who dont believe in birth control are filling up public schools with kids who refuse to speak English to play the race card, soon entire counties will turn Spanish only zones. So much for the Mexican Reconquista of the lands lost in 1845. Amnesty will make things even worse with more people jumping over trampling on dreams of legal immigrants like your ancestors
If you think this is not bad, then you are welcome to start writing in Spanish.
Your issue is what the federal goverment should be focussed on fixing rather than playing politics over SB1070. The problem has perpetuated across administrations led by both Democrats and Republicans but the egregious actions of the current administration stray far from fixing the situation and only serve to perpetuate it. I am still waiting for the Democrats to try pushing an amnesty bill to try to buy votes before they are all voted out of office. What a tragedy for the country if such a quid pro quo event occurs.
The Graham-Schumer amnesty is what Pres. Obama has endorsed. All three claim that illegal aliens have to go to the back of the immigration line, but that's a flat lie. It's unlimited amnesty with all lawbreaking forgiven for a small fine; illegal aliens not only do NOT go to the back of the line, but a special separate process is created for them and them alone and they are vaulted in ahead of the front of the line. No penalties for driving without a license or insurance (and driving up our rates), no penalty for ditching out on hospital bills at our expense either. No concern for unemployment and underemployment rates, all comers who don't have major criminal records get in as a reward for being here illegally. There's no mention of reducing legal immigration numbers to compensate for the millions and no mention of considerations for natural resources, overcrowded schools, or money sent out of our country in these times.
The other is the Dream Amnesty Act, another unlimited amnesty already submitted in Congress. It claims to require illegal aliens to complete 2 years of higher ed during a 6 year span, or serve 2 years in the military but those requirements can be waived entirely and it includes higher ed assistance. No degree is ever required, just two years of attendance if they don't waive the requirement entirely. How many Americans would like higher ed assistance?
The outcome of the DoJ suit is yet to come, but there are substantial defences for Arizona in that too.
Being hispanic is not and never has been the issue. It is being from another country and here without permission.
As much as human rights activists would like it, the world is not all one country and people need permission to go from nation to nation. Some nations do not have the best intentions for their neighbors so perhaps it is better that way for now.
With Mexico's fight against anything we do to secure our border, it could make one wonder what intentions they have.
That is why the perfect world of Star Trek is out of reach of humanity as of the moment.
It ain't about race. It is about nationality and nationalism on both sides. Efforts to make it about race or civil rights are simply propaganda.
If illegal aliens were green and there were 12 million here without authorization, yes there would still be an outcry. America just would not have a green population for them to blend in with, so it would be slightly easier to sort and deport them.
their "look the other way" attitude toward illegal aliens. When I found out that three
of my five students were illegal, I lost my enthusiasm for teaching.
There are plenty of Spanish-speaking people who are legally here,
but the current system mixes them in with those who are illegally present.
The Feds have done nothing to fix this problem. Let the States take care of it.
When Mexico and Central and South America became involved in the fight against SB1070 it became obvious that this really is about nationality and not American civil rights or race.
You have your first fan by the by.
Atound 7% of AZ inhabitants is illegal so maybe if we sent them home AZ's unemployment rate would drop to 2% and Mexico's would go up to 16%.
The problem we have here is borders and all nations have them. Some
nations do not like that other nations do. Our neighbor to the South for example.
So many people want so badly for immigration to be about race.
"Unregistered Aliens" refers to citizens of other nations, not a race. The reason race is in this debate is that most of the 500,000 unregistered aliens in Arizona are hispanic.
American latinos did not object when foriegners sought to hide among them, but that is no reason illegal foriegners should not be ejected from the country. The American hispanics have ID
showing their citizenship. They may be inconvienianced. Most countries like to know who is there and these unregistered foriegners don't seem to want us to, perhaps because they also know they should not be here.
This is another desperate attempt to portray Arizona in specific and America
in general as racist because we, like every other nation in the world, have
immigration laws and borders.
Neither border security or amnesty are attainable goals given the present
conditions. Let move on to other parts of our immigration system we can fix
and put those ultra-divisive issues on the back burner.
Even unregistered foriegners would be better off if we did.
As much as you would like it to be about race - as much as you seem to want everything to be about race, this is about many other things.
1. Frustration with our feds only solution always being amnesty. That is just wrong and send a bad message to the illegals and the world.
2. We don't need millions more people and we already take in more then we can handle and more then the rest of the world combined. We have 310 million - will hit 450 million by 2050 and 600 million by end of this century WITHOUT amnesty. We need hostile nations to give us energy. We are out of good water sources in many states. We are paving over open spaces for houses and strip malls.
3. It's not fair to legal immigrants. They waited, learned english, paid fees and did it the right way.
4. It's not fair to the poor. They are the ones most hurt. Low wage jobs suffer the most wage deflation from massive immigration since most immigrants are uneducated. The poor also suffer when scarce social programs run out of money or have to split it ever further.
5. It's not fair to the environment. We don't NEED more people anymore. Immigration is an outdated ideal. People (bodies) are the reason we are having issues with energy/natural resource depletion/global warming/etc. Once here immigrants up their impact about 7 times over if they stayed home
You are fanned. Thanks
http://caffeinatedthoughts.com/?p=8174
We were supposed to get "border security" as our part of this deal. That's the way it was sold to us. "We'll legalize the aliens who are here already, and then seal the border."
Well, the first part happened, but the second never did. And, 25 years later, we're back where we started. This entire debate should not need to be happening. We should use whatever amount of concrete, barbed wire, border patrol, and other law enforcement (including SB1070) to enforce some kind of border control.
The feds have been stonewalling this effort for 25 years. I'm glad to see Arizona finally step up.
The 1986 amnesty gave about 2.7-3.2 million illegals amnesty, depending on your source and how they get the figures.
Since then we have had 6 more amnesties with millions more given amnesty. Those amnesties didn't even have a gratuitous promise of enforcement, but where rather straight up amnesty.
So we have been training the illegals and the rest of the world to ignore our immigration laws for so long that it's almost a guarantee that this is what we got. It doesn't mean we can't correct it very simply. All we need to do is publicly state that there will never be another amnesty/pathway to citizenship/comprehensive reofrm of any sort where people who have come here illegally get to stay. Then we take away the other rewards/incentives for them to come here like AZ is doing. The news stories are showing that this law and this approach WILL work when it has already been proven many times over amnesty WON"T work.
BUT STATES AND LOCALITIES CAN ENFORCE EXISTING FEDERAL STATUTES. This has already been the law for 4 years:
The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRAIRA), effective September 30, 1996, added Section 287(g), performance of immigration officer functions by state officers and employees, to the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). This authorizes the secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to enter into agreements with state and local law enforcement agencies, permitting designated officers to perform immigration law enforcement functions, pursuant to a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), provided that the local law enforcement officers receive appropriate training and function under the supervision of sworn U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers.
http://www.ice.gov/doclib/pi/news/factsheets/060816dc287gfactsheet.pdf
My point, which you do not dispute, is that there IS a current option for local and state enforcement, vacating all claims that enforcement of Federal immigration is restricted to Federal officers.
"Shall Arizon be permitted to coin currency?"
Sorry, that's deflection. I am pointing out the law of the land, not advocating wild hypotheticals.
If you think 287(g) is wrong, write another blog advocating against it, or start a lawsuit.
"...
No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay."
The moral and ethical problem with SB 1070 is that it's not effective nor intended to be effective at deterring illegal immigration - there are simpler and less controversial ways to do that - but rather that it's intended to force an entire class of people who might give the police probable cause - namely anyone with an accent or who looks Latino or Arab - to carry around citizenship papers and produce those papers to the police on demand, whereas white or black people without accents won't need to.
Perhaps more disturbing is the intention behind the law, which is to create a wedge issue to hammer Hispanics, rather than create a common sense and rational fix for immigration issues.
I think you're unfairly dismissing the just frustration of many law abiding citizens over the lack of enforcement by the Federal government.
I also think you're dismissing the devastating effects of illegal immigration on the working poor. Lawns were cut, beds were made. and dishes were washed before illegal immigrants displaced Americans doing those jobs. Competition from illegal immigrants cut wages in half in the meat packing industry over the last dozen years, and now the workforce in meatpacking is almost exclusively illegal immigrants.
As for the perfunctory comments about illegal immigrants working in the blazing sun picking crops - as little as 3% of illegal immigrants work in agriculture:
"Illegal immigrants can be found working in many sectors of the U.S. economy. About 3 percent work in agriculture; 33 percent have jobs in service industries; and substantial numbers can be found in construction and related occupations (16 percent) and in production, installation and repair (17 percent)."
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4703307
If nothing else SB1070 is forcing a national discussion on enforcement of existing Federal laws.