By: Jennifer Lawson-Zepeda
Nuke Arizona! I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again. It’s a wasted state and has the most xenophobic people in the world! Hooray, though! The Supreme Court is where it all happens. It’s where our country’s laws are made or broken. Sometimes it does it right!
SB 1070 Overturned
Recently, this building was the place that Arizona’s controversial immigration law — SB 1070 — was reversed, for the most part.
In spite of that snaggle-faced hag, Governor Janet Brewer, and her efforts to back senseless racist policies; the high court found SB 1070 as unjust as the rest of America.
Excluding the “papers please” provision of the bill, the bill was knocked down. And most of us believe that last provision will be knocked out, later, too. Certainly, the Supreme Court wrote their decision to allow this to happen with:
“This opinion does not foreclose other preemption and constitutional challenges to the law as interpreted and applied after it goes into effect.”
(Source: The Supreme Court Just Overturned Most Of The Arizona Immigration Law)
Janet Brewer’s Controversial Approval
The law was signed by Governor Jan Brewer a few years ago who supported the provisions that made it a state crime to be an illegal immigrant and to hire illegal immigrants. She also supported the controversial provision in SB 1070 that required law enforcement officials to check the legal status of detained and arrested people with “reasonable suspicion.”
Brewer, in a statement, called it a “victory for the rule of law. It is also a victory for the 10thAmendment and all Americans who believe in the inherent right and responsibility of states to defend their citizens. After more than two years of legal challenges, the heart of SB 1070 can now be implemented in accordance with the U.S. Constitution.”
(Source: The Supreme Court Just Overturned Most Of The Arizona Immigration Law)
No, Brewer! The heart of SB 1070 was overturned. Thank God!
Arizona cannot arrest anyone for being an “illegal immigrant.” Your state cannot arrest people who hire undocumented workers. In fact, soon, it’s likely you won’t be able to request a person’s papers based on racial profiling. After two years of legal challenges, your state bill was pretty much ruled as unjust.
Mitt Romney’s Immigration Policies
Mitt Romney has called Arizona’s immigration law a “model for the nation.”
One might wonder why he didn’t state this when he addressed Latino business leaders in Arizona as they begged him to support some form of the Dream Act.
TEMPE, Ariz. — a former president of the University of Arizona pleaded with Mitt Romney on Friday to support some version of the Dream Act to give “a glimmer of hope” to college students who are not in the United States legally.
“They’re bright. They can help carry this country forward,” Manuel Pacheco told the Republican presidential candidate during a round-table discussion with Latino business leaders in Tempe. “I think it would be a shame to lose that particular talent that they bring.”
(Source: Mitt Romney meets with Latino business leaders)
Instead, Romney kept his immigration solutions vague, stating that he had some plans for immigration if he became president; but not explaining what they were.
Romney listened politely, nodding, as Pacheco pushed him to effectively change his strong opposition to the Dream Act, which would provide a path to citizenship for undocumented college students. Romney, who took a hard line on immigration issues in the Republican primary, has said he would veto the Dream Act if it were passed while he was president.
When Pacheco finished speaking, Romney smiled and said: “Thank you! Appreciate that! Thank you.” He then turned to the next participant and did not discuss the matter further.
(Source: Mitt Romney meets with Latino business leaders)
What would anyone expect though, from a flip-flopper, like Romney? I’m not sure there is any issue he has made a steadfast decision and stuck with it on.
Wouldn’t it have been more honest for him to admit he supported the racist policies of Arizona’s SB 1070?
Even Romney’s own party members have pulled away from him on this. Marco Rubio, one of the Vice Presidential candidates being vetted to run on the GOP ticket with Romney has pulled away from Romney’s views on Arizona’s immigration bill. Senator Marco Rubio had called for consideration of a modified version of the legislation.
Polls have shown Romney badly trailing President Obama among Latino voters. The president leads by 64% to 24% in one recent survey.
(Source: Mitt Romney meets with Latino business leaders)
Important to Latinos?
Some ask how much this issue matters to Hispanics. Ask yourself this. If you had a family member who you knew might be deported because of screwed up immigration laws, would this be important to you?
Well, many of us have relatives such as that. And to some of us, they are our significant others and the other parent of our Latin American children. Some of them are our children.
In Nevada, 41% of Latinos know someone who has been involved in immigration proceedings. Take a poll of most communities around where you live, if there is a high percentage of Latinos and you’ll see how important this issue is.
Is it the only issue we concern ourselves with? No! But it sits high on our monitor — especially with many of us knowing people who have been deported without proper due process when dealing with the immigration courts. Especially, when we’ve spent almost a decade now, watching immigration policies affecting many American citizens of Latino descent, through racial profiling.
Tell the mother of a Texas-born U.S. citizen who was detained, questioned and deported to Matamoros, Mexico, in the middle of the night that immigration policy is not important and she’ll probably spit in your face.
Tell the North Carolina native who was wrongly deported because U.S. investigators chose to ignore all of the evidence pointing to the fact that this person was a U.S. citizen.
Tell the thousands and thousands of relatives who have watched our relatives being denied of basic human rights — held in detention during their immigration hearings.
Tell those of us who have witnessed the corruption within the process of immigration hearings.
Tell that to the children divided from their families, after their parents are deported.
You can fool yourselves, but this is a hot button issue for most Latinos.
If you don’t get that, then your head has been in the sand for over a decade! And yes, it WILL affect our vote!
As a matter of fact, because both parties have been ignoring this, I’m voting for Alexander/Mendoza in 2012.
As Andrew Jackson once said – “the courts have made their ruling, now let’s see them enforce it.”
With MALDEF watching? Are you kidding? They’ll be all over Governor Janet Brewer.
http://www.maldef.org/assets/pdf/DefCounsel_Section2B.pdf
With this clause, alone:
“Please notify Plaintiffs’ Counsel immediatey if you disagree with Plaintiffs’ position an if you intend to implement Section 2(B) before the federal courts rule that the injunction is dissolved. Please provide any authority for your position, if you take a contrary position to the Plaintiffs.”
They are explaining that all action on behalf of racial profiling will be included in the next round of proceedings. Sheriff Joe Arpaio would be smart to tread lightly on his sick need to stomp all over the civil rights of immigrants he loves to target. That statement indicates that this sort of action most likely will be reviewed in the next proceedings to remove the racial profiling section 2(B).
@ Jen,
You forget that we live in a nascent police state – the pigs can keep on profiling based on “race” provided that they claim that they are *not* profiling on the basis of “race.” They can just make up new excuses for their actions (from suspicion of cartel activity to “terrorism”) and most people won’t question these assertions.
It doesn’t matter how many “civil rights” organizations are watching because (a) we don’t have any “civil rights” (those are just pleasant lies that we’ve been sold) and (b) those that watch the states paramilitaries too closely will suddenly find themselves facing troubles with the “law” themselves (if they are lucky) or else mysteriously “diappear” or have “unfortunate fates” (if they are not lucky).
Like it or not, the “law” is not what’s written on a piece of paper – the “law” is whatever the guy with the most cash and guns *says* it is…
Azazel,
You are correct to a point, but even police states are careful when a political watchful eye is monitoring them. For instance, Long Beach California has a lengthy history of excessive force by their police. But when the press highlights a story, they reduce the number of times they beat the crap out of a citizen, for fear of elected officials losing their jobs. For instance, when ACLU was investigating the number of human rights violations immigrants were suffering at CCA in San Diego, while my husband was there, CCA worked hard to clean up what the ACLU might see. They moved the vocal people to Arizona for a while, so they couldn’t talk to the ACLU and reporters. We knew people that were sent to Arizona for a few weeks, so I know this is true. They also kept the reporters and ACLU reps away from people like my husband or tried to minimize their complaints by claiming they had psychiatric issues. And suddenly, all of the medical treatment my husband had been needing for months was attended to. Even the meals got better. And that’s how political clout works, temporarily. With MALDEF, I believe a few people like Sheriff Joe Arpaio (who has already been investigated by the FBI for several human rights and civil rights abuses) will keep their behavior either hidden or reduce it for now.
@ Jen,
Yes, but the key words here are “for now” – as soon as the bad press goes away the pigs go right back to their old ways and will even crack down on organizations that are supposed to be monitoring them (just like they hit those pacifist groups monitoring “human rights” [something of a misnomer – as “rights” are a fiction…] violations a couple years back for “terrorism” charges).
The fact of the matter here is this – so long as a monopoly on force exists you can’t get the upper hand over it for more than a brief period of time, meaning that one will have to struggle against it constantly just to stand still. The only way to go forward is to eliminate it altogether…
That’s the problem. We fight, and we think we’re moving forward. Than the big dogs come back, meaner and nastier than before. Twenty years ago, i thought discrimination was on the wane and i would never have to see its ugly face again. Now look at it. It’s as though there never had been a civil rights movement, as though people had never sacrificed their lives to move the world in the right direction. It’s not enough to change laws that never should have been introduced in the first place. We need to change people. We need to change them so much, they become horrified by abuse, by discrimination, by elitism and injustice, so they will say, “this is terrible. Let’s go get the bastards that did this”.
Azazel,
I can give you a specific demonstration of the fact that watchdog organizations enact change.
In Los Angeles, we used to have a gang task force called the Community Resources Against Street Hoodlums or CRASH unit. Here’s a run down on what happened from Wikipedia:
“More than 70 police officers either assigned to or associated with the Rampart CRASH unit were implicated in some form of misconduct, making it one of the most widespread cases of documented police misconduct in United States history. The convicted offenses include unprovoked shootings, unprovoked beatings, planting of false evidence, framing of suspects, stealing and dealing narcotics, bank robbery, perjury, and the covering up of evidence of these activities.”
My husband told me how he was lifted by five police officers of and used as a battering ram against the pavement. So I know that this was true. He also told me of the way police officers in the CRASH unit threatened families of gang members; people who weren’t even in gangs, even demanding sex from some of the girlfriends of gang members.
Wikipedia goes on to say:
“Partly as a result of the scandal, Police Chief Bernard Parks was not rehired by Mayor James K. Hahn in 2001. Both the scandal and the de-facto firing of Parks are believed to have precipitated Mayor Hahn’s defeat by Antonio Villaraigosa in the 2005 election….The city of Los Angeles faced more than 140 civil suits resulting from the Rampart scandal, with total estimated settlement costs around $125 million. Javier Ovando was awarded a $15 million settlement on November 21, 2000, the largest police misconduct settlement in Los Angeles history. Twenty-nine other civil suits were settled for nearly $11 million.”
I know that the L.A. CRASH unit is no longer in existence. They destroyed themselves with their own corruption.
(Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rampart_scandal)
Now, let’s fast forward to the case of a homeless man who was beaten to death in Fullerton. The Kelly Thomas death has not only caused two officers to be prosecuted for murder, but it has created debate about systemic reforms in treatment of the mentally ill and homeless. Not only did the FBI become involved, but the community backlash caused three council members to be recalled during the primary elections of Fullerton, Ca. The police Chief was placed on Administrative Leave because of the beating.
You can’t say that watching the corrupt police doesn’t change things. In many cases it does. That it has to go to the level of death or severe trauma is wrong, I agree. But it does change things.
For instance, the death of one man at San Pedro’s Immigration Detention facility had a HUGE impact on that facility. It shut it down.
I’m not endorsing police corruption. But let’s not misrepresent the capability of community action. It can change things.
It certainly stopped immigrant children from being jailed in Hutto Texas. I know about this one personally, because I was active in requesting this, even though I don’t live in Texas. My dear friends involved in immigrant defense down there had been boycotting this practice for some time, around 2006 and 2007. We united several organizations from around the U.S. towards action on this. Hutto was under threat of closing due to the action of immigrant’s rights group. They removed the children from that facility.
Now, one can argue that they continue to abuse women, and many are working on that; but there has been some change. But it requires hard work, not people who throw their hands up and give up.
Let’s stop pretending we can’t do a damned thing to change things. That’s a lazy man’s excuse for not getting involved. We can change things, but it takes hard work and education. I agree with Karlsie that it begins with changing the attitudes of people.
Jen, your concept of “change” is very limited – sure the pigs might break up a controvertial unit or a few indivdiual politicians outsted (often given up as “sacrificial lambs” to convince people they still have real power) if enough outrage is expressed, but what happens when the outrage dies down (and it eventually does die down)? What happens when the disbanded unit is reformed under a new name or elements thereof penetrate other paramilitary units? What happens when the politicians that replaced the outed ones follow more or less the same agenda as their predecessors (which they almost always do)?
Any change effected within the established order is temporary at best (and a mere show for the public at worst…) – if there’s one thing experience has taught me, it’s that meaningful change can only be brought about from *outside* the boundries of “law” that are drawn for us: that the system can’t be reformed, only fought against – and this fight is to the death…
Azazel,
I think it’s your concept of ‘change’ that is limited. It’s definitely narrow minded.
I’m trying to open up the idea to accept all forms of change; not just a specific change that I feel is under my level of approval.
Look…I get that you have a complete dissatisfaction with authority and feel the only way to change is anarchy or political unrest. I had that feeling for years too; especially with what happened to our life.
But to be so narrow in your focus as to completely dismiss everything else? That’s a bit too self serving, for me. Why? Because it’s saying that nobody else ‘gets it’ and that your understanding is the last word on what is going on.
I’m sorry, but even history has proven that one person’s understanding of the world generally leads to a fascist view of things. Every dictator feels the same about their ideas. No one knows better than them. Sorry, but I can’t endorse this type of selective approach to the world’s problems. History has taught me that it never works.
You ask what happens when certain units are disbanded? Well, in history, it has caused Nazis to lose wars. It has caused people to reunite with war ravaged countries, after fascist regimes were broken, in cases like Chile and Argentina. It has taken a country from slavery to freedom.
Are there still Nazis? Yes. Are there still fascists? Yes. Are there still racists? Yes. And there always will be, because even those people are convinced that their way is the only way. But that doesn’t mean that we can’t try to do what we can to work on keeping their influence minimal.
That you choose not to acknowledge these things as significant? That’s on you! For some of us, these things are VERY significant. Women’s rights changed for a while and that was significant. Are we back to patriarchy, today? To me, we are. But we removed patriarchy for awhile. Rodney King had an impact on racism. Still, there are racists in all cultures. But we are still trying to remove the effects of racism and we’ve made enough progress that we no longer have black and white water fountains; and blacks can become president.
Is change temporary? Certainly. As the saying goes, “History repeats itself.”
But does that mean that people shouldn’t try to change things? HELL NO! You can elect anarchy. Certainly, people have different solutions. But your way is not the ONLY way. That…I know.