PS10KGamache

Teacher Lesson Page

 * Boston Public Library Research Day**

Primary Source Log - Index Card listing departments visited -

Link to BA Blog with Chinese-American Resources.

//**Sources for Latin American US Citizens**//

**Ariz. paper raps politicians on immigration ** Associated Press /  May 3, 2010  PHOENIX — Arizona’s largest newspaper criticized US Senators John McCain and Jon Kyl and a host of other elected officials in a rare front-page editorial yesterday, saying the politicians have failed to find solutions to illegal immigration.


 * || **Discuss ** ||
 * ^  || [|**COMMENTS (159)**] ||

The state has become the target of calls for boycotts since adopting a law that requires local and state law enforcement officers to question people about their immigration status if they are suspected of committing a crime, and if there is reason to suspect they are in the country illegally. “The federal government is abdicating its duty on the border. Arizona politicians are pandering to public fear,’’ the Arizona Republic said. “The result is a state law that intimidates Latinos while doing nothing to curb illegal immigration.’’ The editorial appeared one day after thousands marched against the law in Phoenix and Tucson, Chicago, New York, San Francisco, and Los Angeles. McCain was once a champion of comprehensive immigration reform, but has abandoned his principles while he fights off a GOP primary challenge this year from former congressman J.D. Hayworth, the newspaper said. Kyl has also dropped efforts for comprehensive reform and is no longer willing to work with Democrats now that he is a member of the Senate Republican leadership, the paper said. The editorial also named Governor Jan Brewer, Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, and former governor and current Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano. “Ensconced in a Democratic administration, she forgot all the arguments she once used to demand the Bush administration address immigration reform and reimburse Arizona for the costs of the broken border,’’ the Republic said. “Put in charge of Obama’s effort to craft immigration reform, she couldn’t get the thing out of neutral.’’ Napolitano, on “Fox News Sunday,’’ said more resources were being poured into securing the border than ever before. “Every resource that can be put at that border is being put at the border,’’ she said. “Every security is being made. But we still need comprehensive immigration reform.’’ © Copyright 2010 Globe Newspaper Company.

<span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% white; color: #464646; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 8.5pt; line-height: 10.5pt; margin: 0in 0in 7.5pt;">http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2010/05/03/ariz_paper_raps_politicians_on_immigration/

<span style="color: blue; font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">[|Arizona Bans Ethnic Studies] <span style="color: blue; font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">[|We Don’t All Look Alike…] <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;"> » **<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 18pt;">Is SB 1070 a Modern “Chinese Exclusion Law”? ** <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">May 12th, 2010


 * || <span style="color: blue; font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">[|Share] ||

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">A cartoon from a nineteenth century newspaper, detailing contemporary anti-Chinese immigrant sentiment <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">Last month, Arizona passed an insidious piece of legislation known as <span style="color: blue; font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">SB 1070 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;"> — a law that makes being an illegal immigrant a state crime and empowers state and city police officers to conduct immigration checks. While supporters of the law claim that it only enforces federal immigration guidelines, the fact of the matter is that SB 1070 is little more than a modern-day Chinese Exclusion Law. <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">How ironic is it, than, that SB 1070 was passed within days of the start of Asian American Heritage Month? <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">In 1858, the Chinese Exclusion Law (not to be confused with the later federal Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882) was part of a series of laws passed by California city and state governments that attempted to address the so-called “problem” of Chinese immigrants by making life virtually impossible for a Chinese immigrant. Coupled with laws that taxed foreign miners, prevented the ringing of gongs, and banned the wearing of queues (the fashion of the day for Chinese men) in city prisons, <span style="color: blue; font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">the Chinese Exclusion Law of 1858 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">made it a state crime for a “Chinese” or “Mongolian” person to land in a California seaport. This is eerily similar to the text of SB 1070, which charges illegal immigrants with a misdemeanor crime of trespassing in the state of Arizona if they are found to be within Arizona state borders. <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">While SB 1070 ( <span style="color: blue; font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">read the full text <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">) does not specifically target Latino men and women (and, indeed, the law may affect any person of colour who appears to be of the same ethnicity as common illegal immigrants — including South Americans and Asians), it is virtually certain that SB 1070 will institutionalize racial profiling particularly against Latinos because of Arizona’s position along the U.S.-Mexico border. In essence, Arizona is attempting to affect federal immigration policies using state laws to name and target undesired immigrants, just as California attempted to do more than a century ago. <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">Furthermore, the Chinese Exclusion Law made it a state crime (punishable by a hefty fine or imprisonment) for any person transporting an immigrant to a California seaport. Specifically, <span style="color: blue; font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">the text of the Chinese Exclusion Law reads <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">: <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">…it shall be unlawful for any man, or person, whether captain or commander, or other person, in charge of, or interested in, or employed on board of, or passenger upon, any vessel, or vessels, of any nature or description whatsoever, to knowingly allow, or permit, any Chinese or Mongolian, on and after such time, to enter any of the ports of this state, to land therein, or at any place, or places, within the borders of this state, and any person of persons violating any of the provisions of this act, shall be held and deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof shall be subject to a fine in any sum not less than four hundred dollars, nor more than six hundred dollars, for each and every offence, or imprisonment in the county jail of the county in which the said offence was committed, for a period of not less than three months, nor more than one year, or by both such fine and imprisonment. <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">Again, this passage is virtually indistinguishable from SB 1070, which applies a punishment to any person who knowingly transports an illegal immigrant into the state or anywhere within the state using any form of motor vehicle. <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">But what hammers the similarity home, for me, is that SB 1070, like the Chinese Exclusion Law, was not passed in isolation by their respective state governments. More than 150 years separate SB 1070 from the Chinese Exclusion Law, yet both the spirit and the practice of targeting immigrants is the same: in response to a perceived influx of immigrants of colour, a flurry of city and state laws are passed in rapid succession to make life unlivable for the targeted immigrant community. In Arizona, SB 1070 is joined by other laws coming down the pipeline that target aspects of the Latino community here in Arizona, specifically <span style="color: blue; font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">HB 2281 which was conceived of to target a publicly-funded Mexican-American high school studies program <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">. Furthermore, <span style="color: blue; font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">state laws requiring employers to use E-Verify <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;"> to determine the immigration status of prospective employers are, in spirit, the same as California’s law of 1862 — called //An Act to Protect Free White Labor against Competition with Chinese Coolie Labor, and to Discourage the Immigration of the Chinese into the State of California// <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">– which instituted a fine for any Chinese person who was deemed to be in competition for “White” jobs (i.e., if they were employed as anything other than a rice, tea, sugar or coffee farmer). In both cases, fears that people of colour are taking up all the jobs fuel the passing of laws that limit employment opportunities for the targeted immigrant groups. <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">While it is tempting to dismiss Arizona as a progressively whacko state, history teaches us that state governments are the testing grounds for federal legislation. The Chinese Exclusion Law codified an anti-Chinese sentiment that, thirty years later, was institutionalized as the more well-known <span style="color: blue; font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">. The Chinese Exclusion Act specifically prevented any Chinese person from being able to naturalize as an American citizen, and it is widely criticized as being the most Draconian immigration law in American history. Furthermore, it introduced a new form of legislative codespeak with which to target Chinese people — as aliens ineligible for citizenship. Following the CEA of 1882, subsequent local and state laws could be pased affecting aliens ineligible for citizenship that would target the local Chinese community without ever having to refer to race or ethnicity. <span style="color: blue; font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">Folks who are better scholars of American immigration law than I <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;"> have compared SB 1070 to the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, but I think the parallel is better drawn to California’s Chinese Exclusion Law of 1858. In both cases, the state oversteps its jurisdiction and attempts — and arguably succeeds — in influencing federal immigration statutes by passing Orwellian state laws that criminalize immigration into its borders. And, in both cases, we see these laws enacted during a time of fervent anti-minority anger (than against Chinese, now against Latinos) and as part of a series of state and local laws targeting specific minority groups. <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">The only difference here is that whereas the Chinese Exclusion Law of 1858 paved the way for the devastating Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 (which stayed in effect for 60 years until it was repealed in 1943 by the Magnuson Act which finally allowed people of Chinese descent to naturalize as American citizens), there is still time to interrupt the sentiments that allowed SB 1070 to pass from making it to the halls of the federal legislature. <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">To that end, Asian Americans cannot remain quiet about SB 1070. Our community has lived the consequences of SB 1070, and the nearly 100 years of institutionalized racism that a law like SB 1070 introduces against a minority people. This is the very month when we are supposed to remember our history — so let us do just that: we cannot allow America to forget the lessons that our history teaches. http://www.reappropriate.com/2010/05/12/is-sb-1070-a-modern-chinese-exclusion-law/ <span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% white; display: block; line-height: 16.8pt; margin: 0in 0in 0pt; text-align: center;">**<span style="color: #ebebd2; font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; font-size: 10pt; letter-spacing: 3.6pt;">May 3, 2010 ** **<span style="color: #ebebd2; font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; font-size: 10pt; letter-spacing: 3.6pt;">Op-Ed, 657 words ** **<span style="color: #333333; font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; font-size: 17pt;">New Law Damages Arizona's Credibility ** **<span style="color: #333333; font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; font-size: 14.5pt;">I believe we need comprehensive, nationwide immigration reform. ** **<span style="color: #003366; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 8.5pt; text-decoration: none;">[|By][|Raul M. Grijalva] ** <span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% white; color: #333333; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 9.5pt; line-height: 16.8pt; margin: 7.5pt 0in;">Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer has signed a statewide law forcing local police officers to question and potentially detain anyone they “reasonably suspect” to be an undocumented immigrant. If you believe our local law enforcement agencies, which will be required to implement the mandates of this law, it will lead to mistrust between police and the people they have sworn to protect. <span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% white; color: #333333; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 9.5pt; line-height: 16.8pt; margin: 7.5pt 0in;">This new immigration law violates due process, civil rights, and federal sovereignty over immigration policy. While I believe the courts will quickly overturn it, I'm concerned that the damage to my home state’s credibility has already been done. <span style="color: #333333; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 9.5pt;">Arizona has long been the epicenter of our national immigration debate. Unfortunately, that debate has been driven by extremists like Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, who is under a federal investigation for civil rights abuses. Arpaio, like Brewer, seems to believe that every immigrant is equally capable of being a violent drug dealer to be dealt with harshly. Although this belief has no basis in fact, it has been the foundation of a fear-based campaign against immigrants and people of Hispanic descent for years. <span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% white; color: #333333; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 9.5pt; line-height: 16.8pt; margin: 7.5pt 0in;">Indeed, opportunistic political voices have worked hard to make a connection between crime and immigration where none exists. Forget the rhetoric for a moment and consider the facts. In 2008, the Immigration Policy Center found that on the national level, U.S.-born men aged 18 to 39 are five times more likely to be incarcerated than immigrants. While the number of undocumented immigrants in the country doubled between 1994 and 2005, violent crime declined by nearly 35 percent and property crimes by 26 percent over the same period. <span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% white; color: #333333; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 9.5pt; line-height: 16.8pt; margin: 7.5pt 0in;">Unfortunately, this information doesn’t change the way people think about immigration. It’s become a gut reaction issue. If you think immigrants are criminals, then a law targeting anyone “reasonably suspected” of being an immigrant sounds like a good idea. Even though prominent officials at all levels--from President Barack Obama to border county sheriffs--have called the law unjust and counterproductive, there will always be a constituency for this kind of punitive measure. <span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% white; color: #333333; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 9.5pt; line-height: 16.8pt; margin: 7.5pt 0in;">Turning immigrants into scapegoats for every social and economic setback is not what America should be about. The new Arizona law has introduced the unspoken word “race” into the debate. By promoting racial profiling as a legal tool, it has effectively unmasked a very real motivation for some people to oppose meaningful immigration reform. <span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% white; color: #333333; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 9.5pt; line-height: 16.8pt; margin: 7.5pt 0in;">I believe we need comprehensive, nationwide immigration reform. While we continue to debate what that should look like, I believe the laws of this country should be enforced and respected. Those laws include the principle that the federal government, not state or local authorities, sets immigration policy. States can no more supersede federal immigration law than enter into their own treaties with foreign governments. By inventing a new way for local officials to treat American citizens as potential criminals, Arizona has violated that principle. The state has said, in effect, that if you’re walking down the street and forgot your wallet at home, you could be hauled downtown because you look like an undocumented immigrant. That’s not how the rule of law works in this country. <span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% white; color: #333333; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 9.5pt; line-height: 16.8pt; margin: 7.5pt 0in;">On a practical level, local law enforcement agencies do not have the manpower or financial capacity to serve triple duty as street cops, Border Patrol agents and Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers. Conservatives who worry about government overreach and unfunded mandates should be up in arms about this law. Their silence is disappointing. This is not a left-right issue. It’s a question of basic constitutional process. <span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% white; color: #333333; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 9.5pt; line-height: 16.8pt; margin: 7.5pt 0in;">Voters shouldn't be blind to the troubling aspects of this law: It sets a legal precedent that anyone “reasonably suspected” of a crime is subject to questioning and search without a warrant, and it suggests that other states should feel free to invent their own immigration laws. This isn't a road we want to travel any further down than we already have. <span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% white; color: #333333; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 9.5pt; line-height: 16.8pt; margin: 7.5pt 0in;">This law should be overturned without delay, and Congress should take up comprehensive reform the same day. <span style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% white; color: #666666; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 8.5pt; line-height: 16.8pt; margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">U.S. Rep. Raúl M. Grijalva represents Arizona’s Seventh Congressional District and co-chairs the Congressional Progressive Caucus. [] **// Sources for Chinese American Immigrants //** **// Sources for Athenians //**



**// from //** =A pictorial history of Greece: ancient and modern= By Samuel Griswold Goodrich (1846) p. 238 Google Books