Fear and loathing
Passage of a ban on so-called sanctuary cities has nothing to do with pragmatic policing.
With slightly more than a month to go in the 85th legislative session, Texas lawmakers could be devoting their remaining time and energy to issues that will benefit the people who sent them to Austin. They could be finding both means and money to educate the state’s young people. They could be debating health care, transportation, economic development, environmental protection, safeguarding vulnerable children in foster care … the list could go on.
Instead, the Republican majority in the House last week devoted itself to passing divisive legislation that will make the task of local law enforcement even more difficult, that will break up families and that will sow anxiety and suspicion among members of minority communities around the state. Even more absurd, the bill they pushed through demands that law officers follow state mandates or end up behind bars themselves.
The issue at hand was Senate Bill 4, legislation to ban so-called sanctuary cities, jurisdictions that prevent local law enforcement agencies from asking about a person’s immigration status or enforcing federal immigration law. Written by state Sen. Charles Perry, R-Lubbock, and carried in the House by state Rep. Charlie Geren, R-Fort Worth, the bill passed the House along party lines, 94-53. It had passed the Senate earlier in slightly different form; the two bills must now be reconciled in conference committee.
One of Gov. Greg Abbott’s priorities, SB 4 finds Texas once again following the lead of states in thrall to tea party populists with little sense of the greater good. First it was Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick’s bathroom bill, a Lone Star version of the North Carolina anti-transgender legislation that cost the Tarheel State billions before it was rescinded. And now it’s SB 4, a bill that would thrill disgraced former sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Ariz. As local immigration attorney Charles Foster points out, SB 4 is essentially “show me your papers” or “guilty of driving while brown,” legislation similar to Arizona’s late and unlamented law that the U.S. Supreme Court gutted in 2012. Officers are instructed not to discriminate, but when they stop a white driver for a minor traffic violation, they’re not likely to ask for a passport or birth certificate. But what happens when they stop a brown-skinned driver?
State Rep. Gene Wu, an immigrant himself, knows the answer. The Houston Democrat choked up during last Wednesday’s marathon debate, telling his colleagues that the bill evoked memories of the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 and the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II. “Those are laws that were created out of fear. Those are laws that were created out of hatred and misunderstanding,” Wu said. So is SB 4. Houston Police Chief Art Acevedo and his counterparts in Dallas, El Paso, San Antonio and cities in the lower Rio Grande Valley told lawmakers the bill would undermine trust for police in minority communities. Police officers know the law will cause brown-skinned residents, both living here legally and illegally, to live in fear.
Members of minority communities are painfully aware that a routine traffic stop can mean they won’t be going home that night. Even our neighbors with papers have to be worried about the embarrassment and inconvenience or worse that could arise from misunderstandings or faulty documentation. Already they’re worried about Trump-inspired Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers threatening to break down their door at night as they root out residents without papers. Would you report a crime, interact with law enforcement authorities in any way in the current atmosphere? SB 4 contributes to the anxiety.
Acevedo also pointed out that the bill would divert his department’s limited crime-fighting resources to immigrationrelated matters that are federal responsibilities. “We don’t have the resources, nor do we have the bandwidth nor the desire to be ICE agents,” he said. “If I wanted to work for ICE, I would’ve applied for ICE.”
GOP lawmakers weren’t listening, in large part because their motive for pushing such reprehensible legislation has nothing to do with pragmatic policing or good community relations. Read the coverage of the 16-hour debate, and you’ll get a better sense of what they were really up to. The newspaper stories mentioned legislators with names like Wu, Anchia, Lucio, Hernandez and Bernal, lawmakers who condemned the bill in deeply personal terms. Photos accompanying the articles showed white males, middle-aged and beyond, on the floor of the House, index fingers raised to signify a yes vote despite the heartfelt opposition of their minority colleagues.
Threatened by an inexorable demographic squeeze in this minority-majority state, conservative white lawmakers realize they’re making a last stand. You’ll see their pictures in the history books one day. The caption might read, “the last running of the white buffalo.” Members of minority communities are painfully aware that a routine traffic stop can mean they won’t be going home that night.