In print | Published April 29, 2010

The bill Arizona Governor Jan Brewer signed into law last Friday has reminded activists why they want immigration reform. The bill, SB1070, would make the failure to carry immigration documentation criminal under state law, authorizing not only federal officers to apprehend illegal immigrants, as has always been the case, but expanding this power to state police. Moreover, it requires police officers to stop anyone who appears to be an illegal immigrant and to apprehend them if they are not carrying immigration documents. Those who are not carrying appropriate documents might face jail time, court fees and other harassments.

While the bill appears to come out of the blue, it is in fact the result of Arizona’s increasing problems with illegal immigration: “The Economist” explains in its latest issue that Arizona faces the most border crossings of any state and now experiences drug-related crime that spills over from Mexico, including the recent shooting of a border rancher. These are serious problems, but they do not vindicate the racist law recently passed, which discriminates against Hispanics and violates civil liberties.

Two related effects make the bill unconstitutional and dangerous. First, it directly targets Hispanics, who will be a primary target for discrimination based on their physical appearance, resulting in harm not only to illegal immigrants but also to the countless Hispanic Americans who are here legally. In addition, it perpetuates the idea that all Hispanics in the U.S. are here illegally. Punitive laws against specific groups are banned in the Constitution for the good reason that they violate the spirit of equality. Illegal immigrants, too, deserve protection from targeted discrimination by the authorities.

Second, the new law violates the civil liberties of everyone who lives in Arizona or visits the state. Requiring individuals to always carry proof of national identification while in Arizona breaches privacy and changes the role of the police from guards of citizens’ safety to investigators, a job that requires federal oversight and for which they are not trained.

We must emphasize too that the new law puts police officers in an extremely uncomfortable situation. Presumably, the state of Arizona will not provide the police with a description of “typical” illegal immigrants, because it would undoubtedly face even greater legal issues than it does already. As a result, officers on the ground will be forced to be racist and check on citizens or aliens when they do nothing wrong or face job loss if they do not execute their orders. The law, in fact, specifically encourages citizens to keep tabs on the state police to ensure they carry out their new orders. History has shown time and again that dangerous expansions of police power are often a prelude to the formation of a police state with terrible consequences for civil and political rights.

The Phoenix was glad to see that students, upon learning of the Arizona law, promptly organized protests. Some wore provocative signs carrying slogans such as “In Arizona, would you arrest me?” and others met to create posters that they put up around campus. It’s important to remember that some Swarthmore students are Arizonans and that others plan to visit the state and may now be exposed to institutionalized discrimination. But on the whole, Swatties should be concerned because it violates the rights of a large group of Americans that is already marginalized.

A boycott of Arizona based on avoiding the state as a destination for official college trips would send a strong message, especially if other institutions and organizations follow suit. Swarthmore should not wait to join others in a boycott—it should reach out to others and be a leader in such a movement. The Phoenix would like to see a coalition of students, members of the administration and perhaps members of the Board of Managers that would articulate college opposition, outline immediate measures and reach out to peer colleges to act together. Such inter-college cooperation, mentioning the discrimination members of our community will now face in Arizona, could send Arizonans a strong message that they must repeal this law before it becomes active in August.

The college prides itself on its acceptance of individuals and groups from different backgrounds. It should translate this acceptance into taking the lead in an effort to tell Arizona that it has gone too far. Moreover, while the passage and enactment of this outrageous law is not a consequence of congressional inaction on immigration reform, it stresses the urgent need to put the issue on the national agenda.

« RETURN TO OPINIONS

« PREV ARTICLE | NEXT ARTICLE »