A List of 1300 in Utah

Apparently someone or some group circulated a list in Utah that contains the social security numbers and other highly personal information of 1300 suspected undocumented immigrants. State officials in Utah are now investigating the origin of that list. From TPM:

State agencies are investigating whether any of their employees leaked Social Security numbers and other personal information after a list of 1,300 people who an anonymous group claims are illegal immigrants was circulated around Utah.

The anonymous group mailed the list to several media outlets, law enforcement agencies and others this week, frightening the state's Hispanic community. A letter accompanying the list demanded that those on it be deported immediately.

The list also contains highly detailed personal information such as Social Security numbers, birth dates, workplaces, addresses and phone numbers. Names of children are included, along with due dates of pregnant women on the list.

This is not the way that things should be handled. There is a reason why we have a law enforcement system, and a reason why even suspected criminals have rights. The same laws that protect suspects also protects everyone else. Hopefully more information about this comes out soon.

*I found this via Jay Tea's post over at Wizbang.

David Coates on Immigration Politics

Debates about immigration seem to crop up during times of financial and political crisis. This is not a new trend here in the United States--just take a look back into history for your answer. Often, when the economy takes a turn for the disastrous, people turn the blame toward migrants, whether or not there is actually any valid reason for doing so. This is also known, simply, as scapegoating.

The political economist David Coates writes:

Immigration by foreign-born workers, and unemployment among native-born ones, may go together in modern America, but the relationship between them is neither simple nor directly causal. On the contrary, three things at least are very clear in the data on contemporary trends in employment and wages – at least very clear to those not subsumed in Arizona-type hysteria. (1) Immigration, legal or otherwise, is not the main cause of the current recession. (2) The overall impact of immigration on employment, productivity and income in the contemporary US economy is broadly positive; and (3) the very forces triggering migration from the global “south” are the same ones creating unemployment and falling wages in the global “north”.

There are some interesting points to be made here, especially since many pundits and politicians are hanging on to the idea that immigration is one of the main problems of the US economy. Is it really? One of the most interesting points that Coates brings up is the idea that the same "forces" that are pushing people to migrate away from places like Mexico are also creating unemployment in places like the United States.

Coates' post is absolutely worth a read. The rest is here.

*I found Coates via Maxine Udall, who writes that he is on of her "favorite political economists."

The Economics of Immigration: Robert Shapiro

I came across this post via Mark Thoma's blog. Pretty relevant stuff these days:

Waves of new immigrants often spark economic anxiety and cultural discomfort, as well as occasional violence and wide-net crackdowns, on the Arizona model. Even here, a nation comprised almost entirely of immigrants and their descendents, we’ve seen these reactions not only in recent times but also a century ago, when waves of poor immigrants from Europe arrived here. With a hundred years’ distance, however, we can now see that those early waves of immigration were generally associated not with economic dislocation and national decline, but with extraordinary economic boom times and America’s emergence as the world’s leading economy. And for much the same reasons as a century ago, recent evidence indicates that the economic effects of the current waves of immigration are also largely positive.

Read the rest here.

Arizona, Citizenship, and Rights

All of the recent events in Arizona have me thinking about citizenship and rights. Where do our laws begin and end? Do US ideals about inalienable rights stop at our borders? What kinds of rights should be afforded to all people in all places? In his 2008 book The Latino Threat, Leo Chavez writes,

For many, especially anti-immigration groups such as the Minutemen project, citizenship is also about rights, privileges, and responsibilities. What distinguishes citizens from aliens are precisely the rights and privileges reserved for citizens. However, immigrants, including undocumented immigrants, also have rights in many nations, including the United States, where the Constitution speaks of "persons," not citizens, when describing inalienable rights. Consequently, immigrants have enjoyed rights to juridical due process, fair labor standards and practices, education, emergency medical care, and more. Complicating this issue further are claims to basic human rights or rights based on universal or extranational agreements, such as the United Nations' Universal Declaration of Human Rights (2008: 12).

Human Rights Watch recently issued a press release, stating that the law in Arizona is a violation of an international treaty that the US signed. Again, this issue brings up the conflict between individual notions of rights based upon citizenship, and a more universal conception of human rights that cuts across national boundaries. From the press release:

(San Francisco) - Arizona's new immigration law violates an international anti-racism treaty that is binding on all government officials in the United States, Human Rights Watch said today.

Key provisions of the "Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act," enacted by Arizona on April 23, 2010, conflict with the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, which the United States ratified in 1994, Human Rights Watch said. "LWL - living while Latino - has become hazardous in Arizona," said Alison Parker, US director at Human Rights Watch. "Arizona's governor and law enforcement officials should know that with this law, they are violating an international treaty."

Under the new law, police officers will be empowered to stop and interrogate any person whom they "reasonably suspect" might be in the United States illegally. The law includes provisions allowing Arizona residents who believe the local police are not enforcing the law vigorously enough to sue a city or town. As a result, police officers will be under pressure to make an arrest, even when in doubt, rather than risk a lawsuit, resulting in wrongful arrests and unfair enforcement, Human Rights Watch said.

This clash between national boundaries and human rights gets really complex and fraught with tension. The public debate about immigration in the United States is certainly polarizing. Often, many issues get conflated into one overheated subject. But it's important to separate out all of the details and attempt to gain understanding of the wider picture. There is the drug trade issue, and then there is the issue with migrants who come to the US in search of work. In much public debate, these two factors are all too often treated as if they stem from the same root causes, but they don't. The drug trade is fueled in large part by the massive demand in the US. There is a reason why cartels are so heavily armed; because they are in a lucrative business. As for the people who migrate in search of work, it might be important to consider not only the demand in the US, but also some of the larger structural issues (like NAFTA, or the relationship between the Mexican State and many of its poor citizens) when trying to gain a deeper understanding of why so many people are willing to take such huge risks in order to find work.

There is definitely a need to address the immigration issue. It is most definitely not a good thing to have this many people crossing the border in dangerous conditions where they are at risk of assault, extortion, and abuse. So there is a need to change the ways in which the immigration system work, absolutely. But this does not mean that the US should go down the road that Arizona is heading, which basically upholds the "Latino Threat Narrative" (blaming Latinos as the principal cause of the issue) that Chavez talks about:

The Latino Threat Narrative is a social imaginary in which Latinos are "virtual characters." They exist as "illegal aliens," "illegitimate recipients of organ donations," "highly fertile invaders," and "unassimilable separatists bent on a reconquest of the Southwestern United States" (Chavez 2008: 42).

The narrative about Latinos (whether Mexican, Honduran, Guatemalan, or otherwise) has a long history in the United States, and has gone through various stages. One of the most persistent themes characterizes Latinos as outsiders on the inside who never truly become American citizens (despite substantial ties to the US and years of living in the country). The narrative that Chavez talks about casts Latinos as a subgroup that for some reason or another never quite fits in (and this is a common trend in anti-immigrant rhetoric). This is the kind of logic that is being used to justify the recent legislation in Arizona.

However, there is no need to start profiling people based upon physical and cultural characteristics. In a search for a solution to the immigration issues that the US faces, there is also a need to maintain basic notions about human rights, dignity, and due process. The Arizona law, which opens the door for highly subjective law enforcement, is only going to lead to more conflicts. As Chavez writes,

It is time to put the Latino Threat Narrative to rest. It is counterproductive and divisive and creates self-fulfilling prophesies. It is an inaccurate depiction of the everyday lives of Latino immigrants and Latinos in general. Citizenship in all its manifestations is hard enough to construct, and it deserves honest, productive, clear-eyed representations of all members of society, as well as public policies that reduce obstacles to integration and social and economic mobility (2008: 186).

I agree that this narrative needs to be challenged and dispelled. Stereotypical notions about massive groups of people--in this case Latinos--only serves to uphold unjust practices, whether at the individual or state level. In the search for answers to complex problems like immigration, it's all the more important to retain notions of rights that extend beyond national boundaries. This makes sense, in the end, because humanity clearly extends far beyond political borders.

Arizona Republic: Pressure on all sides

Gov. Brewer of Arizona is expected, supposedly, to make an announcement about Senate Bill 1070 today--and there is tremendous pressure on all sides. This comes from an article in the Arizona Republic by Alia Beard Rau and Glen Creno:

As Gov. Jan Brewer contemplated how to proceed on the nation's toughest legislation against illegal immigration, opponents of the bill converged in protest at the state Capitol on Thursday and Brewer announced efforts to beef up law enforcement along the Arizona-Mexico border.

At a speech Thursday night before a crowd of Arizona Latino leaders, Brewer reiterated, "I am not prepared to announce a decision on Senate Bill 1070. What I decide will be based on what's right for Arizona."

Brewer has not said when she will take action, but political observers expected her to act today. She has until Saturday to decide.

Sponsored by Sen. Russell Pearce, R-Mesa, the bill would make it a state crime to be in the United States illegally and would require anyone whom police suspect of being in the country illegally to produce "an alien registration document," such as a green card or other proof of citizenship, such as a passport or Arizona driver's license.

I will post a little more about this later on today.

Arizona's Turn for the Worse

Lawmakers in Arizona are trying to push through a new bill that is fueling some serious protests. From the Chicago Tribune:

Under the Arizona bill, federal immigration violations would become state crimes as well, often with higher penalties. Local and state police who have a "reasonable suspicion" that someone is in the country illegally would be required — not authorized, required — to determine that person's immigration status and arrest those without documents. Even legal immigrants would be subject to arrest if they aren't carrying their papers. And drivers who give undocumented immigrants a ride could have their cars impounded.

A "reasonable suspicion," leaves a lot of room for interpretation, and opens up a floodgate for a slew of conflicts. Not to mention civil lawsuits. From AZCentral.com:

Newly appointed interim Maricopa County Attorney Rick Romley on Thursday asked Gov. Jan Brewer to veto the immigration bill sent to her by Arizona lawmakers. An interfaith coalition of religious leaders, too, expressed concerns about the legislation in a statement and encouraged her to reject it.

In protest, more than 1,000 school kids walked out of class near the Arizona Capitol:

PHOENIX -- More than a thousand students walked out of several Valley high schools Thursday to protest Arizona's controversial immigration enforcement bill.

The protest was organized via Twitter and Facebook, according to students who left their campuses and headed for the state Capitol.

The move came despite loudspeaker warnings from their principal to stay in class.

Here is a little more on the matter from Chicago Tribune columnist Steve Chapman:

Arizona legislators are fed up with being terrorized by illegal immigrants, and they have passed a law to get tough. Under the measure, passed this week and sent to the governor, police would have to stop and question anyone they suspect of being in this country without legal authorization.

The bill passed after the fatal shooting of Robert Krentz, a 58-year-old rancher whose killer apparently entered illegally from Mexico. Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu says police are also under siege: "We've had numerous officers that have been killed by illegal immigrants in Arizona."

Even Sen. John McCain, once a supporter of immigration reform, has called for the immediate placement of 3,000 National Guard soldiers along the border.

It's no surprise that Arizonans resent the recent influx of unauthorized foreigners, some of them criminals. But there is less here than meets the eye.

The state has an estimated 460,000 illegal immigrants. But contrary to myth, they have not brought an epidemic of murder and mayhem with them. Surprise of surprises, the state has gotten safer.

Over the last decade, the violent crime rate has dropped by 19 percent, while property crime is down by 20 percent. Crime has also declined in the rest of the country, but not as fast as in Arizona.

More about this soon.

UPDATE: For more links and information, look here.