Tags
amnesty, Apartheid, Arizona, Arizona SB 1070, Belfast, Desmond Tutu, immigration, Jan Brewer, Joe Arpaio, Nobel Peace Prize, Northern Ireland, Seamus Heaney, South Africa, United States, United States Supreme Court
It was just three years ago. I was sitting in my office, only half-enjoying a visit from a former student – each of us was tense, awaiting Arizona Governor Jan Brewer’s announcement regarding SB1070. Surely she would do the humane and right thing? Surely she would refuse to sign an insidious and un-American piece of legislation that would criminalize undocumented immigrants and would require state and city police officers to check the immigration status of a detained, stopped or arrested individual, if they reasonably suspect he or she could be an undocumented immigrant. Surely a Governor of these United States in 21st Century America would veto any legislation that had the potential to institutionalize racial profiling?
In an instant, Governor Brewer showed us that the lessons of history do not apply to her. Swiftly and proudly, she signed an inhumane bill into law, and the world finally paid attention to an Arizona that, measure by measure, would continue to make the American life unlivable for immigrants.
What I found most harrowing then, with my personal baggage as an immigrant from Northern Ireland living in Arizona, was the prospect of immigrants being required to have their immigration papers on their person at all times. Shades of my home country in the 1980s, during The Troubles, when it was not uncommon for me to hand over my driver’s license for inspection by a member of the British Army or an RUC officer at random road closures and checkpoints.
I well recall a snowy afternoon at the top of the Ligoniel Road in Belfast. A student teacher, not yet twenty-one and heading home for Christmas, I was moving out of the Halls of Residence at Stranmillis College. My little Datsun weighed down with library books and lecture notes, clothes and toiletries, boxes of vinyl records and cassette tapes, a collection of concert posters wrapped in rubber bands, my prized hi-fi, and a violin, I somehow looked less like a university student and more, perhaps, like an IRA terrorist. Even though I had my license and could answer politely and truthfully, the young soldiers’ questions about where I had been and where I was going, still I had to step aside in the slush and the snow, watching and waiting as they rifled through the contents of my car, looking under the seats and in the trunk, emptying out my make-up bag, disturbing the folders of college papers. All in the name of security I know, but to this day I question the randomness of it. I remember raging inside – seething – that I was being subjected to such treatment in my own country. My. Own. Country. I said nothing. Of course, I said nothing, and I was soon sent on my way, but I never forgot it or the way it made me wonder about what it was about me on that particular day, that would cause British soldiers with guns to interrogate me and have me step out of my vehicle and search its contents? Did I fit some profile? Did I look like a terrorist? What was the ‘reasonable suspicion?”
Fast forward. A victory – in 2012, the United States Supreme Court threw out some sections of SB1070 including the part that required immigrants like me to carry their papers. However, the court upheld the most controversial requirement that police officers question the immigration status of those they suspect of being in the country illegally. Governor Brewer and her supporters have indicated that law enforcement officers receive training so there is no racial profiling. As an immigrant and as an educator, I marvel at any curriculum that will guarantee such results for those officers who might just harbor anti-immigrant feelings. In May 2013, a federal judge ruled that, indeed, Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, who fancies himself as the toughest sheriff in America, and his deputies “engage regularly in unconstitutional racial profiling against Latinos. The judge ordered the department to immediately stop targeting Latinos based on their race.” Would that the judge could peer into Mr. Arpaio’s heart before any ruling.
When my favorite poet, Seamus Heaney, delivered his acceptance speech for the Nobel Prize in 1995, he shared a heart-stopping moment from the history of my anguished and wounded Northern Ireland. In the story he related, lies a powerful lesson about humanity – one that would serve well Joe Arpaio, President Obama, Governor Brewer, and anyone who aspires to the ideals of America, to the future we desire for our children and ourselves:
“One of the most harrowing moments in the whole history of the harrowing of the heart in Northern Ireland came when a minibus full of workers being driven home one January evening in 1976 was held up by armed and masked men and the occupants of the van ordered at gunpoint to line up at the side of the road. Then one of the masked executioners said to them, “Any Catholics among you, step out here”. As it happened, this particular group, with one exception, were all Protestants, so the presumption must have been that the masked men were Protestant paramilitaries about to carry out a tit-for-tat sectarian killing of the Catholic as the odd man out, the one who would have been presumed to be in sympathy with the IRA and all its actions. It was a terrible moment for him, caught between dread and witness, but he did make a motion to step forward. Then, the story goes, in that split second of decision, and in the relative cover of the winter evening darkness, he felt the hand of the Protestant worker next to him take his hand and squeeze it in a signal that said no, don’t move, we’ll not betray you, nobody need know what faith or party you belong to. All in vain, however, for the man stepped out of the line; but instead of finding a gun at his temple, he was thrown backward and away as the gunmen opened fire on those remaining in the line, for these were not Protestant terrorists, but members, presumably, of the Provisional IRA . . . The birth of the future we desire is surely in the contraction which that terrified Catholic felt on the roadside when another hand gripped his hand, not in the gunfire that followed, so absolute and so desolate, if also so much a part of the music of what happens.”
********
We all get it. We understand that illegal immigration is a problem of monumental proportion for these United States, but SB 1070 is not the answer. It is not the answer for those immigrant children who are in Arizona because their parents brought them here in search of the dream of America that also drew me to these shores. Children who, hands on their hearts, pledge faithfully allegiance to the United States flag every day in elementary school. Children who have committed no crime but who are criminalized nonetheless because they don’t have papers. And, they don’t have papers because there is no legal pathway to citizenship for them. Living in the shadows, they can only wait and hope that humanity will out.
Without a doubt, SB1070 has awakened in many of us the spirit that defines the transcendent and universal struggle for humanity. But not enough of us.
As in other deeply wounded places, I detect a hardening of the heart in Arizona. It dismays me to note that while our elected officials grapple with comprehensive immigration reform and all that it entails, we continue to rip families apart with over 1,000 daily deportations nationally. According to presente.org, “over 1,500,000 people have been deported since January 2009. At this rate, President Obama will have deported more people in six years than all people deported before 1997.” How many of these are mothers and fathers now separated from their children? How “American” is it to deny a place at the table to any needy child?
I recall a college assignment from years ago, requiring us to draw comparisons between South Africa and Northern Ireland. Trying to confront the political impasse and to overcome the sectarianism that had defined us for too long, it made sense to learn from South Africa’s shameful past. But I never thought I would be compelled to revisit the topic as an immigrant in Arizona in the 21st century. Never. SB1070 has taken me back to times I thought were behind us forever.
Times such as those when an apartheid government condoned the “banning of people.” Between 1948 and 1991, such a government severely restricted the movement of black South Africans and their political activities. The apartheid government’s mantra was simple:
- Ban them.
- Keep silent their opposition to apartheid.
- Harass them at the slightest provocation.
They took it one step further by banning political opponents and using indefinite detention, imprisonment, torture, and political assassination. I could digress here and go back to the enactment of Internment Law in my Northern Ireland, but that is another sad note for another day. And finally, in South Africa, banning led to banishment, removing people from their homes and families, stripping them of their citizenship, and deporting them to remote areas of the country, the ill-named “homelands,” often without basic living necessities and always indefinitely.
For me, SB1070 is eerily reminiscent of early apartheid laws in South Africa, particularly the “pass laws” that were put in place to segregate the population and to severely restrict the movement of South African blacks. It required all African males over the age of 16 to carry a “reference book” (formerly a ‘passbook’), documentation of personal information and employment history. Following its enactment, many Africans were then compelled to violate the pass laws in order to find work to support their families. Of course, this led to harassment, fines, and arrests. You get the picture. And, it is deeply troubling, isn’t it? So much so that people will rise up against it, right?
Invariably some people rise up, as they have been doing for the past three years in Arizona. In South Africa, there was the early Defiance Campaign, the massive women’s protest in Pretoria (1956), and then the 1960 massacre of 69 protestors at a ‘pass burning’ at the police station in Sharpeville. But, we need more people. More people to rise up. Rise. Up. Yesterday’s three year anniversary of SB 1070 brought out in Phoenix, only a small group of protestors, on a march organized by the unflagging, grassroots movement, Puente, Arizona. Only fifty people, according to the Associated Press, marched in opposition to the landmark SB 1070. Why? Where’s the rage?
As I see it, SB1070 needs to sit on a shelf along with the pass laws of Apartheid, the Internment Act Law in Northern Ireland, and that book of laws in Nazi Germany prior to World War II that required Jews to carry papers and citizens to prove they weren’t Jewish.
Commenting on SB1070 three years ago, Archbishop Desmond Tutu raised the specter of apartheid, where black Africans could be jailed for being in their own country without their papers, degraded and deemed less worthy because of the color of their skin,
Abominations such as Apartheid do not start with an entire population suddenly becoming inhumane. They start here… They start with stripping people of rights and dignity – such as the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. Not because it is right, but because you can.
Elizabeth Aquino said:
What an incredible and informed piece of writing — I do hope you’ll submit it to a journal or newspaper op-ed, Yvonne. It deserves a wide readership!
Editor said:
Thanks very much, Elizabeth. I am confounded that we still don’t have a solution for so many wonderful young people who have given their all in an American education system and are poised to give back, but cannot.
lesleypr said:
A poignant, powerful and masterful piece of writing, Yvonne! I had a similar experience to yours – but mine was at that hateful Gate 49 at Heathrow airport in 1989. The shock and humiliation I felt stayed with me for years. I hope this abomination of a law is revoked – and soon! X
Editor said:
We may have been there at the same time, Lesley! I remember the barman refused to accept my ten pound note because it was an Ulster Bank note and not Bank of England. I’ve never forgotten how that made me feel.
x
jbaird said:
I love this piece, Yvonne. Already we are experiencing in California a scarcity of workers to pick strawberries because of border patrol tightening. If we can’t feel it in our hearts, we Americans should at least feel it in our pocketbooks, when the cost of produce skyrockets. My ex moved to Arizona at least partly because he liked its strict immigration policies and his ability to buy any gun he wanted. Frankly, that scares me, and I’m glad he moved far away from me. Keep up your voice. You WILL be heard. You MUST be heard. xo
Editor said:
Hi Jan,
Wow. Thank you. Sometimes I think the very idea of America just unravels in Arizona with its immigration laws and its guns.
Thank God for the amazing people in Arizona who refuse to give up and all those DREAMers.
xo
Catherine said:
Whew. You open my eyes a little wider with your writing, Yvonne. I knew things were going on down there, but to hear it from your perspective . . . wow.
Susan said:
You have opened my eyes to a whole set of things I knew nothing about. The story of the shooting over religion especially when everyone didn’t step forward except the one man who thought he’d be killed and was the only one not killed was heartbreaking. Great post!
Editor said:
Thank you Susan. That story will stay with me forever. I just wish we could learn from the countries whose histories have been written in the blood, sweat, and tears of the most vulnerable.
NotDownOrOut said:
Yvonne, I respect you and your views. But I am not in complete agreement with you. And I assume you wrote to spark debate because you are concerned about the lack of attention to this issue. So I will engage. There is a way to gain citizenship. It requires people to apply for the right to live and work here and eventually to become citizens. There are provisions in our laws for refuge and asylum. There are limits. I would be interested to know what your view is on the fact that there are limits. Do you think they should be set higher so we can legally enjoy lower berry prices? If extending of citizenship is being done to lower tomato prices, I’m not sure that is salutary social policy. Documented or not, agricultural workers are prey to terrible abusers. The recent documentary on rape in our agricultural fields (I think it was on Frontline on public TV) shows that being here in the U.S. is no immunity from danger and deprivation of basic human rights. I think it’s worse for the undocumented–no papers means protest of working conditions gets you deported. But we do have work permit programs. And there are studies that show that many undocumented Polish immigrants returned to Poland in or after 2008. They were here for work, not citizenship, refuge, or asylum. Should we treat all who come here equally or is it fair, as other countries do, to have programs for travel, education, work, refuge, asylum, humanitarian aid, etc.?
The problems of the children exist in part because our laws make one born here a citizen. That has served as an incentive for some to enter without having complied with our laws. Some of us focus on the plight of our southern neighbors who are brought here in dangerous situations by smugglers. I do not like to stand by silently and watch people be abused so am deeply concerned about stories of people locked in trucks or robbed by persons masquerading as helpers. But there are people who plan luxury vacations here from home countries without violence or strife or extreme poverty when they are about to go into labor to make their children citizens even though they know that does not mean their families will be able to stay. They hope their case will be different. We did not as a country make them do that. And, if the families want to be together and we deport the families, I concede that we will de facto send some U.S. citizen children away with their families. Should we let everyone with a U.S. child stay? There are enemies of this country that come here to hurt us. Is a U.S.-born child a talisman for immunity from deportation that we should accept? I don’t think our nation is there yet.
Legislation is under consideration right now that would address many of the children’s situations. We also offer citizenship to some now. It requires military service for some, other things for others. Every person without papers is not deported. NPR recently ran a report about children of undocumented parents insisting on arrest in part so that they could be adjudicated and, on being found to be no risk to U.S. security, allowed to stay because their deportation was a low priority. Deportations may be at a very high level compared with prior laws, but the number of undocumented persons continues rising.
I agree that the children cannot be blamed for what parents have done and may be/become good citizens, but when you call for laws to be taken off the books, what will you advocate in their place? No limits on immigration? No requirement that people comply with applications processes? How will you deal with the criminals, the drug runners, the terrorists? Because they want to be here, too. And these immigration laws can, as a counterweight to causing problems and permitting injustice, give us ways to investigate the real reasons for entry and staying in our country. I think the fundamental principle of territory lies behind the existence of the nation state. I do not think it is practical to ignore the fact that borders are not just about exclusion. They are about association. They are about commonality even though they may be used for ignoble purposes by some.
On the subject of deportations, I have been following the numerous reports on NPR about detention in spaces with no beds except cold floors, no lights that turn out. I do not ever condone inhumane treatment because of questioned or questionable legal status in this country. I think we have to evaluate cases and, to some extent, treat the constant stream of undocumented immigrants as refugees and make available asylum, but that does not mean that it is right to ignore the failure to comply with laws–even laws that I agree have gone too far because they promote and forgive racial profiling.
Today you seem very focused on carrying of papers. Of course, if one has them, then there is no problem. I cannot enter certain parking garages and office buildings without my “papers.” I am asked for them at least once a week, and I have no issue with property interests and security concerns. You object to randomness. I have never been stopped in Arizona, but have been stopped numerous times on roads for sobriety checkpoints. I have shown registration (title) and insurance, and driving papers in addition to have a flashlight shined in my face. I don’t like it, but randomness is a policy that reduces its alternative–profiling.
The Heaney story is deeply moving, but is that the sort of stop happening in Arizona? If so, I don’t hear that up here in Illinois.
The reason that I recognize (from discussion of this topic) for papers checks is that the checks are conducted in conjunction with ordinary government functions. I am open to further education on this point. You’re on the scene in Arizona. I am not.
When I lived in DC I saw profiling in action. African American friends were stopped when coming to visit me in a white, wealthy community. No reasonable suspicion, just race as an excuse. After the stop they went back home. A message had been delivered. Profiling exists without random stops. It won’t change until we deal with what is small and petty and mean inside us. I am all for programs that offer compassion and dignity and respect for people. Should we only allow stops for reasonable suspicion of crime and decriminalize undocumented presence here? What would that system be like? I’m curious to hear more of what you think and what others think.
Great post! It is a topic I think about quite a bit these days. I hope my long reply did not cause me to offend.
Editor said:
Wow, I’m not sure where to begin with a response, Cheryl. As an immigrant who was fortunate enough to marry an American (although I did overstay my visa all those years ago) and someone who worked very closely with the undocumented children of immigrants, I am very close to this issue. As someone who came from a country that continues to segregate Protestants and Catholics in schools, I didn’t expect to find undocumented and innocent children discriminated against, separated, through no fault of their own. These children came to America as babies and have done nothing wrong; therefore, amnesty – which is forgiveness – should not even apply. They have attended our schools and served our communities and want to work and drive and do all the things that their American born peers do. They are no longer little children, but because the DREAM Act remains elusive, many of them continue to live in the shadows.
As I pointed out, “the show me your papers” provision was struck down, but, I was writing about the Bill when it was first signed into law 3 years ago. When I read it, it reminded me of NOrthern Ireland and South Africa and the feelings that come with being singled out for how you look – catholic? protestant? – determining your religion based on your destination etc I don’t think my particular stop was random at all. I think papers proving your right to be in a country at any given time, or different from the kind you need for your parking.
The Heaney store was not to compare stops, but to talk about the humanity in the gesture between the Protestant and Catholic. In that moment, Heaney talks about the vision of a future we might all aspire too. I think there are lessons in that. In Arizona, hearts have hardened. You need only look at the legislation or listen to the vitriol that flows so freely from those who wrote it. When hearts harden, possibilities diminish, and that is where I think we are.
I’m not offended at all by your thoughts on this, but I think there’s more going on in Arizona than we are really discussing nationally. I think we have grown detached – the media too – using words like “illegals,” or “aliens” to dehumanize people. My personal experience as a white immigrant from Ireland has me thinking I’m considered more “acceptable” than those with brown skin from south of the border. But we don’t talk a lot about that.