Arizona’s state legislature is showing its true colors. On January 7th, the New York Times reported that an ethnic studies class in Tucson had been declared illegal by the state’s newly-elected Attorney General, Tom Horne. The class, called Latino Literature, ruffled the feathers of Arizona’s conservative leadership by utilizing texts with titles like The Pedagogy of the Oppressed and Occupied America. Other nonstandard teaching practices were used, such as “scrutinizing hip-hop lyrics and sprinkling . . . lessons with Spanish words.” The course was taught by a Latino professor and enrolled almost all Mexican-American students in this roughly 40% hispanic city.
The class was declared illegal based on a law passed by the Arizona state legislature in May declaring that school districts will lose 10% of their funding if their ethnic studies programs do not comply with a series of restrictions. Advocating for the overthrow of the United States government is forbidden, as is promoting “resentment toward a race” and “ethnic solidarity instead of individuality.” Attorney General Horne insists that the Latino Literature class is “propagandizing and brainwashing” its students to be discontented.
The Grand Canyon State is making a serious bid for the title of “Most Dystopian State in the Union.” With efforts to quash the Latino community’s attempts to teach their heritage and take pride in their identity, the state legislature is attacking a fundamental American principle: that there is no hierarchy among American citizens. A principle enshrined not only by law, but also by tradition, the instant one receives her American passport or is born here, she becomes as American as any Mayflower descendant. American communities with Latino heritage ought to be able to teach that heritage in school, the same way countless districts teach our nation’s English cultural heritage. The United States has no higher identity than that espoused by the people.
Yet, Arizona seems hellbent on creating tiered citizenship. A bill has made it out of the Arizona state senate that would revoke citizenship of children born to undocumented parents. One of the bill’s sponsors hopes that it will be argued before the Supreme Court to “end the controversy over the true meaning of the 14th Amendment’s citizenship clause.”
Forgive me, but I’m unclear as to what “controversy” he is referring to. The Constitution is painfully vague on many, many things. Yet it is apparent enough that you must be 35 to be president. Equally clear is the section of the 14th Amendment that reads, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” Arizona’s desire to have the Supreme Court rule that children born to illegal immigrants are noncitizens displays their real priorities. Namely, they would rather maintain the current social hierarchy than follow any coherent set of principles.
This bill is supported by conservative Republicans, many of whom, I’m sure, espouse a strict constructionist, if not originalist, reading of the Constitution. The kind of exceedingly –no, laughably –loose constructionist view necessary to believe that the 14th Amendment does not provide for the citizenship of all those born in the United States makes FDR look like Antonin Scalia.
It’s always nice when people expose their true colors. There need not be any more question as to whether the Arizona state legislature is more concerned with the rule of law or propagating racial discrimination. Such targeted, unconstitutional acts as this, that go against both parchment and precedent, reveal that, in the minds of bigots, the rule of law will always take second place to staying on top.
photo credit: Wikimedia Commons
© 2024 Harvard Political Review. All rights reserved.