Denver
The American Educational Research Association's governing council voted overwhelmingly Friday to no longer hold meetings or conferences in the state of Arizona in response to that state's passage of a controversial law calling for police officers to demand proof of legal immigration status of people whom they suspect of being undocumented aliens.
The resolution, approved by every voting member of the council except one who abstained, argues that the new law "is so broad in its reach and enforcement powers that it can have an adverse impact on the freedom to travel or assemble without encroachment." It says the association "will no longer hold meetings or conferences in the state of Arizona until such time as this law is rescinded or AERA otherwise revisits the issue."
At a news conference on Saturday held to announce the adoption of the new resolution, Kris D. Gutiérrez, the association's president-elect, said the council voted on the measure under an organizational bylaw allowing the group to define the appropriate conditions for its meeting locations and take the safety and security of those who will participate into account. Although the group had no plans to hold its annual conference in Arizona any time soon, it routinely holds smaller organizational meetings and other events at Arizona State University, and its leadership was concerned that its members might be stopped or detained by state or local law enforcement officers, she said.
As Ms. Gutiérrez and other AERA representatives at the news conference discussed the resolution, however, it became clear that their objections to the new Arizona law extended well beyond concerns about their members' ability to travel freely without fear of intimidation or run-ins with the police.
Ms. Gutiérrez, an Arizona native who is a professor of learning sciences and literacy in the School of Education at the University of Colorado at Boulder, wore a sign on her conference name tag that said "I could be illegal." She said her organization plans to use its resources to disseminate research on the negative effects of the law, which she sees as likely to impede researchers' efforts to study immigrants who will be fearful of identifying themselves as such.
Patricia Gándara, a professor of education at the University of California at Los Angeles and co-director of the Civil Rights Project there, said, "We are very concerned that Arizona is turning into the new apartheid South." She said the group also worries that the law will derail international education efforts, especially those involving the United States and Mexico, and make immigrant families in Arizona fearful to venture out to send their children to school.
Felice J. Levine, the executive director of AERA, criticized the Arizona measure as not grounded in empirical social-science research on its likely impact on law enforcement and people in that state. She said her organization's leaders feel obliged to speak out against the measure because they fear it will have a chilling effect on research.
Comments
1. amnirov - May 02, 2010 at 05:28 am
The hyperbole here is really getting too much. This measure, however stupid and offensive is NOT apartheid. Ask anyone who actually remembers South Africa under that system. All of this exaggeration is clouding the very real issue of immigration reform. We have to cut back on the hysteria and address ways to open up immigration in a fair and orderly manner, without merely making the underground economy any larger, without encouraging whole scale economic migration, while purposely excluding felons and those who would only burden the nation. But we have to stop with the asinine hysteria. The law will never be enforced. Everyone should already have figured that part out.
Similarly, there is a zero percent chance that a professor of education at the University of Colorado is an illegal alien. Like all universities, they check immigration status before making a job offer. And I think that whenever the article says "immigrant" it really means "illegal immigrant."
I am an immigrant and I always carry both my Green Card and my drivers license. I was asked to produce both in order to get a job. Similarly, whenever I travel (even inside the US) I always carry a passport. When I've travelled outside the country, I've always had to produce said passport, and the legal requirement to do so really hasn't ever "adverse impact on the freedom to travel or assemble without encroachment."
So yes, let's work to get rid of this law. It's a stupid law but the hysteria around it merely provides a smokescreen for the actual issue, which is immigration reform. But at the same time, let's knock it off with the borderline Godwin stuff. It is only going to give ammunition to the right wing.
2. jffoster - May 02, 2010 at 12:12 pm
I AM one of the "right wing" -- probably somewhere to the right of Ramses II, but I join Anmirov in agreement that the hysterical overreaction to a not very bright law is silly. Let's approach this with a measure of calm.
3. kralmajales - May 03, 2010 at 12:19 am
The law is about deporting people. It forces local police to do that job. It makes witnesses to "real" crimes hide in the shadows...much deeper than they did before. And it creates serious distrust between Hispanic Americans and police. It is perfectly normal for people to feel like the law is meant to intimidate them and their families when there are 11 million undocumented people in this country and each of those have friends and family who are here legally.
Before people pass what amount to be stupid laws that infringe on peoples freedom's, they might want to consider the costs--real (like actually enforcing this law when the state has no money) and political (the fact that people are going to think its trash and cut it to pieces).
4. tappat - May 03, 2010 at 08:47 am
I question the validity of the papers presented by commentators #1 and #2 above: Git 'em!!! And Git 'em now!!! But do so with a measure of calm, just to be fair.
5. physicsprof - May 03, 2010 at 10:01 am
What exactly AERA feels I should be outraged about? The fact that while travelling to an out-of-state conference I am supposed to carry an ID (not that it is easy to travel by plane or car without ID anyway) or about the fact that illegal immigrants might get deported because of the law? (Surely AERA is not worried about the costs of the law to Arizona taxpayers.)
6. texasguy - May 03, 2010 at 10:06 am
Attending a meeting in Arizona would force all people who are still permanent residents to carry all the time on them their green cards. Most permanent residents normally keep that card carefully stowed with their passport.
7. physicsprof - May 03, 2010 at 10:20 am
#6, isn't it federal law already?
From Wikipedia:
"The card must be in the possession of the U.S. permanent resident at all times. This means the U.S. permanent resident must have a currently valid card on their person at all times, to show to a USCIS officer, if requested."
8. salrosario - May 03, 2010 at 11:57 am
#7 is correct. When I was a permanent resident I carried my card with me. Right now I tend to carry my driver's license with me, but it would be really painful if I were asked to show it because I look like others that are here illegally. This law doesn't make sense.
9. amnirov - May 03, 2010 at 12:30 pm
I carry my Green Card at all times. It's the law.
10. amy_l - May 03, 2010 at 01:47 pm
"Attending a meeting in Arizona would force all people who are still permanent residents to carry all the time on them their green cards. Most permanent residents normally keep that card carefully stowed with their passport."
You're missing the point. It would also force all of us who look latino/a to carry proof of citizenship, lest we be detained. The Mexican side of my family has been in this country since the 1800's. My grandfather fought in WWII. But if I travel in Arizona, I have to worry about the fact that I have stereotypically Mexican features? Sorry, but no thanks. I'm relieved AERA won't be holding conferences there, and I hope my own professional organization will make the same decision.