Illustration by Caetano Santos.

“I am tired, just as many of you are tired, of seeing our parents being oppressed and denied work opportunities,” said Katherine Tabares, a speaker and youth activist at the “Rally for Citizenship” demonstration at the nation’s capital this past Wednesday. “Not because of their skills — because they are very talented — but because of a nine-digit number that supposedly defines a person in the United States, when it should not.”

Like others who were brought to this country by their parents, Tabares and many Americans are calling for comprehensive immigration reform that is inclusive to all members of our community.

A draft of a comprehensive immigration reform bill was poised to be released this Tuesday but has been set back out of respect for the recent tragedy in Boston. However, leaked information from several anonymous sources suggests a significant component of the bill will focus on border security.

This bill — agreed upon by a bipartisan group of eight senators — will mark the first overhaul of immigration law since 1986. While it claims to create a pathway to citizenship for the country’s estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants, the bill only makes citizenship available to those who arrived in the United States before Dec. 31, 2011.

Other qualifications include a clean criminal record and sufficient proof of financial stability or employment.

Only when applicants meet these qualifications will they be eligible for a 10-year probationary period for citizenship. This prospective pathway needs to be more effective, realistic and expedient.

This 10-year waiting period comes with a startling provision — the federal government must secure 90 percent border security before those eligible can apply for a green card and then eventually, citizenship.

While the legislation is written by a bipartisan group, efforts should be directed toward meeting a fair balance for contentious parts of the bill rather than rushing in a flawed draft to appease Republicans. The Democrats have exchanged a later cut-off date and a strict border security plan to create a long road to citizenship that in no way resembles their original plan for an easy, accessible path to citizenship.

In fact, this is the perfect moment for Republicans to appeal to Latina/o voters — who have remained an untapped and growing demographic — by softening their hardline stance on immigration. While comprehensive immigration reform is not the cure-all to appeal to Latina/o voters, it’s an important issue for many who vote — a fact that is slowly dawning on some Republican legislators.

The bigger picture does not point the finger at one party. We must all realize that a serious comprehensive reform bill involves presenting fair opportunities for undocumented immigrants who have proven their allegiance and good faith to this country. We need to rethink the measures of this bill which require 90 percent border security — an immense task immigrants would need to wait for the US to pull off before they gain citizenship.

The moment is now to pull down unfair obstacles on the path to citizenship.

Illustration by Maren Slobody

The Gang of Eight, a bipartisan group of eight senators, is currently negotiating on new immigration legislation to introduce to Congress. Obama gave his word that if these senators acted in a timely manner, he would not submit his own legislation. Despite claiming to be open to these bipartisan efforts at an immigration plan, the Obama administration has leaked a draft of an immigration bill anyway. City on a Hill Press would like Obama to set a good precedent for the rest of his second term by being more open to, and patient with, efforts toward bipartisan agreement.

The Obama Administration is adamant that this recently leaked draft of the immigration bill was not purposely released. Whether or not this slip-up was intentional, it doesn’t reflect a willingness on Obama’s part to stick to his promises and work peacefully with bipartisan efforts. Republicans in the senate, and particularly Marco Rubio, R-Florida, have expressed feelings that this draft blatantly ignores their desires and seems like Obama’s way of pressuring the committee currently negotiating immigration legislation.

The White House’s proposed draft of the bill would have offered an eight-year pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants as well as required employers to be aware of their employees’ immigration status and possible violation of immigration law. While a streamlined eight-year pathway to citizenship may seem like a reasonable solution to the question of illegal immigration, the legislation ignores issues that arose with previous laws — such as the advantages created for those who illegally immigrated that aren’t provided to law-abiders.

Republicans are outraged by the bill’s ignorance of their demands to tighten down on border security and prevent further violation of immigration law before jumping into loosening the restrictions on acquiring citizenship. Assuming that Obama really never meant for this proposal to see the light of day, it was irresponsible to let it become widely disseminated throughout the White House when it blatantly turns a blind eye to a workable and agreeable solution.

Marco Rubio has asserted that the Obama administration knew full well that this legislation would be dead on arrival in Congress given the GOP’s interests in the issue. If the Republicans have expressed their concerns and desires to Obama regarding an immigration plan, there is no excusable reason to be hostile toward the efforts at a bipartisan resolution.

The future for progress in social issues such as immigration seems brighter every year, and at the outset of his second term, Obama has been very vocal about improving the state of social justice in the country in many ways. We at City on a Hill Press look forward to this and applaud Obama for committing his second term to increasing equality for all — however a push for equality will need to start with equal and fair proceedings in government.

Obama should have been more impeccable with his word, exercised greater responsibility and given the bipartisan committee an opportunity to draft immigration legislation. The next four years will be long and eventful, and the president must take every chance he is given to litigate and try to come to satisfactory compromises. Here’s to hoping the rest of Obama’s time as president won’t be marred by deadlocked negotiations and disagreements that only stall progress even more.

Illustration by Caetano Santos

President Obama’s support of queer rights has improved in the past couple of years. Obama has recently focused on efforts to reform the Boy Scouts of America to be more considerate of queer scout masters. Beyond the symbolic gesture, the president had Sen. John Kerry’s Senate Bill 48, which proposes a quicker path for same-sex couples to receive permanent resident status, be considered by the recently formed bipartisan immigration reform commitee. The move should cement Obama’s commitment to not just talking about queer rights, but voting on them too.

Obama has not always been this vocal on the issue. Infamously, Obama only admitted that same-sex couples deserve the right to marry last year, while taking three years to finish a repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. For much of his first term, Obama was behind his party in championing queer rights, now he’s ahead.

In making our immigration policy friendlier toward same-sex couples, the United States may not only serve as a pinnacle for queer rights, but also attract people who wish to relocate in the face of discrimination and oppression in their home countries. Currently 11 countries feature nationwide queer-rights marriages, while 78 countries find sex between those of the same sex to still be a crime according to the Economist. Though strong, Obama’s actions only hint at how the administration will treat queer rights these next four years.

“Our journey is not complete until our gay brothers and sisters are treated like anyone else under the law,” said Obama in his Inaugural Address. “For if we are truly created equal, then surely the love we commit to one another must be equal as well.”

Obama’s moves and Sen. Kerry’s proposed bill have roots in the Uniting American Families Act, a continually tabled piece of legislation first proposed in 2000. The act has been proposed and tabled 6 times.

Up to 40,000 U.S. nationals will be affected by a policy that grants them and their permanent partner a legal path to citizenship, according to the Washington Post. Family repatriation has been a central part of U.S. immigration policy since the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 and has since reunited thousands of families starting new lives. Granting same-sex immigrant couples the same rights is the right way to move forward.

Opponents of queer rights have been curiously silent as Obama continues fighting for reform. With recent immigrants becoming an important group in our economy, pushing any marginalized group away can be the difference between building an economy of innovators, and merely a satisfactory one.

Beyond immigration, Obama’s recent gesture to push forward allowing queer individuals to officially join the Boy Scouts shows how much the president has changed in his willingness to tackle injustice.

Obama’s role as the honorary president of the Boy Scouts of America allowed him to push forward reform quickly, and get it voted on by the Boy Scouts board of administration, even if that vote was to delay action. Obama’s change of heart and activist role is a welcome addition to his policy.

As the son of a Kenyan immigrant himself, a former community organizer and a member of various church youth groups, Obama knows the toll that these forms of discrimination have on communities. The Boy Scouts have somewhere in the area of 4 million members, according to their official website, while the United States sees millions of immigrants come across its shores each year.

Fighting for reform on behalf of permanent same-sex couples and the Boy Scouts is the type of president we need. These gestures should resonate loudly for all Americans, new and old, queer and straight — no discrimination will be tolerated.

Illustration by Christine Hipp

Election Day will be upon us a mere five days from today. With that fact in mind, City on a Hill Press set out to take the campus’ pulse on the election and the issues surrounding it via an informal and unscientific survey of students, faculty and campus employees. While our sample size was small compared to the campus as a whole and may not fully represent the entire spectrum of diverse opinions held here at UC Santa Cruz, it is nevertheless food for thought as the coming election quickly approaches.

The opinions expressed below are solely those of the individual respondents and do not necessarily represent the beliefs of the office or organization with which they are affiliated.

What issue is most important to you in this election?

“There are many issues of concern, but if pressed to choose one, I would say the economy. Too many people are out of work and are subsequently losing their homes, which is unacceptable for a nation of such

incredible wealth.”

– Professor of History of Art and Visual Culture, Derek Conrad Murray

“Immigration, because I am an immigrant and a student. Immigration and education, mainly, because of what I see from my position as a student and a foreigner.”

– Tona Thiu, third-year astrophysics major

Which presidential candidate do you support and why?

“I don’t support either of them. Although I tend to side with Obama on social policies, neither are interested in uprooting the systemic injustice that I think is the real crux of America’s problems.”

– Jason Towry, fourth-year anthropology major

“Barack Obama. I believe he is a very thoughtful, brilliant man navigating a seriously damaged ship of state more successfully than he gets credit for. His efforts had the effect of keeping us from falling into a true depression, he has re-invigorated our damaged reputation in the world, and he has made changes in national policy despite dealing with the most polarized legislative process since Reconstruction.”

– Lisa Akeson, Director of Real Estate Office at UCSC

What do you think will be the most difficult issue faced by the next president?

“I think one of the most important issues is one neither of them seems to really want to face, and that’s climate change.”

– Anne Hayes, Sciences Development Office

“U.S. imperialism and the environmental crisis.”

– Emma Perez, fifth-year anthropology major

In your opinion, how does this 

election differ from others?

“I see it as different on a personal level. In 2000 when the last president was elected I was single, younger, and relatively new to my chosen career. I had less to lose. Now in 2012, I have a four-year-old and four-month-old, and I am thinking more and more about their future. I really believe that some of the cornerstone principles and programs that have made this country great are in jeopardy. I believe action needs to happen now in order to preserve and improve our country for future generations.”

– Wade Garza, Unit Manager, UC Santa Cruz Dining at Crown/Merrill Dining Commons

“This election … there are higher stakes out there, so I am feeling the energy and the sense of urgency but on a bigger scale than in 2008. Voting in America wasn’t always just going to a [polling place] and casting your vote. Many men and women, of many different hues, religions, etc., paid their lives for this act, which some take for granted … So wherever you land as to where your support lies … just let your voice be heard and vote on Nov. 6, 2012.”

– Marla Wyche-Hall, director of the African American Resource & Cultural Center

What direction would you like to see the U.S. moving toward over the next four years?

“I’d like to see us move toward a situation where we look back and we say ‘remember when most of the front page articles on prime news outlets were written by white males? Remember when you had to be afraid to admit your sexuality in public? Remember that time in the 2000s when we had that terrible recession? Aren’t we glad that we’ve settled down and we’ve learned better how to fit into a global economy and not to try and be isolationist?’ That’s what I would like.”

– Tracy Larrabee, professor of computer engineering

Additional video supplement to this story can be found at sctv28.com this week.

Illustration by Maren Slobody

There are an estimated 4.3 million immigrants living without documentation in Los Angeles, according to its Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa. The rights of these residents should not only be defended, but expected.

It comes as a relief then that Villaraigosa is advocating for photo identification cards that would be available to all residents of L.A. County — regardless of immigration status. This form of identification could serve as a functional ATM card and would allow residents to access city services.

We are glad to see the city of Los Angeles taking the issue of immigrant rights seriously.

Opponents say this new form of photo identification is merely an accommodation for immigrants, who shouldn’t be in the U.S. in the first place. Regardless of your view on whether people “should” come to the U.S. or not, L.A. must support its residents, wherever they come from.

This alternative form of identification would include a photo, among other identifying attributes. According to the Huffington Post, the card would include the person’s name, street address, date of birth, hair color, eye color, height and weight, as well as the optional debit service.

For many people without documentation who are forced to carry around large quantities of cash in the absence of a bank account, this will be a much safer option. For those who cannot obtain a driver’s license because of their immigration status, this is unequivocally a step in the right direction.

However, there are large concerns remaining that need to be answered, namely the uncertainty around using this ID card because of the risk of deportation.

This ID card does not protect people from deportation, it will not be able to function as a driver’s license and it will not allow people to ride commercial planes. Assurances must be made that in no way will this form of identification, which includes many identifying characteristics, be used in a way to deport people without documentation.

On the whole, it is heartening to see that steps are being taken in Los Angeles in favor of rights for people without documentation. At the beginning of this month, L.A. Police Chief Charlie Beck made strides in easing the L.A. Police Department’s deportation policy, announcing that hundreds of immigrants without documentation arrested in nonviolent misdemeanors, like illegal vending or driving without a license, would not be turned over to federal authorities for deportation.

However, we simply do not know whether police will be able to use this card to identify people without documentation. Nor do we know if there has been an increase in the numbers of deportations in cities that have already provided such ID card services, like Oakland, Richmond, San Francisco and San Diego. Mayor Villaraigosa and other members of the Los Angeles City Council must make assurances, and codify them into law, that this form of ID will not be used to aid and abet deportation.

Illustration by Jamie Morton

“I’m Jakadrien Turner, I’m 15 years old, and why am I here?”

According to Dallas TV news station WFAA, that is what one of the latest U.S. citizens to be mistakenly deported told Houston police officers after being taken into custody. The young woman is only one of the latest to suffer as a result of the country’s hawk-like fixation on undocumented immigrants.

Turner’s story is a complicated one. When the police arrested the teenage runaway for misdemeanor theft last April, she initially gave them the made-up name Tika Lanay Cortez and claimed to be from Colombia. According to reports, she later told the truth about her identity, but by then the wheels were already in motion to deport Turner to Colombia — to send her back to a home she’d never had.

That Turner lied might suggest the accidental deportation of U.S. citizens is an isolated incident rather than a recurring issue. But reported numbers suggest this is far more than a fluke. According to The New York Times an estimated 680 U.S. citizens are mistakenly detained every year, and the majority of them are Latino.

This is due in large part to programs like Secure Communities, which keeps records of jailed arrestees’ fingerprints and sends them to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). When immigrants are brought in on misdemeanor or felony charges, or in the case of Arizona, simply for causing suspicion, ICE will flag any potential immigration violators and decide whether to transfer people into federal custody.

Many of these immigrants have already obtained U.S. citizenship, but Secure Communities doesn’t keep track of that. In the eyes of the program, it’s ‘once an immigrant, always an immigrant.’ ICE usually catches any mistakes made by Secure Communities before deporting citizens, but this doesn’t fix the indignity that goes along with being unlawfully detained in a country that you worked long and hard to be accepted into.

The fact that even immigrants who take the legal pathway can face problems with ICE implies a xenophobia that has stretched way too far.

Relying on fingerprints alone clearly has its disadvantages. It would behoove both the police and ICE to actually pay attention to people’s stories, rather than dismiss them in favor of all-too fallible technology. Even better, authorities should eliminate policies that involve deporting every person with misdemeanor charges and brown skin, and shift their attention to the truly violent and troublesome cases.

Doing so would not only be more productive, but also help them to avoid some nasty PR issues. Just ask Jakadrien Turner.

Standing under the spotlight, de la Riva performed her one-woman show, “One Journey,” in front of a live audience of students and staff at the Stevenson Event Center on Feb. 10. Throughout the performance, Riva spoke and sang, laughed and cried, danced and acted, and told stories of her own experiences and the experiences of others she has met along the way.

A UC Santa Cruz and Rainbow Theater alumna, de la Riva penned “One Journey” while earning her master’s degree at New York University.

The play was influenced by real-life stories de la Riva collected during interviews with people from the Juarez, Mexico and El Paso, Texas borderline region.

“I’m originally from a border town — El Paso, Texas [and] Juarez, Mexico,” she said. “I wanted to find a play that represented my community.”

Juarez, Mexico has been repeatedly included in the top 10 and top 50 lists of most dangerous cities in the world, according to the Mercer Quality of Living Survey.

In the first month of the new year, the city has already witnessed 200 deaths — about seven a day, according to a National Public Radio study conducted in 2011. Last year’s death toll surpassed 3,000.

Most of these deaths were connected to drug-related violence among opposing mafia groups.

“It was funny because in recent years El Paso, Texas, was voted one of the safest cities in the United States, while Juarez, right across the border, was voted one of the most dangerous cities in the world,” de la Riva said.

While living in El Paso, de la Riva was able to see Juarez from her high school.

“The fact is there is a war on our border,” she said. “We always think of war as overseas, like Iraq and Israel. We always imagine it as being so far away, but there’s one actually going on right on our land, on our border, with our consent, with our funds. All these people are dying, some from our own nation … [We don’t know] what will it be like in the future, how much trauma will come from 10,000 people being killed in one city alone since 2006.”

One audience member said de la Riva’s performance brought attention to kidnappings and murders of women in the borderline region.

“It’s a struggle for not only Mexicans but for all of us,” said the audience member, who wished to remain nameless. “Those women don’t get any peace, [but] what do they have to do with the drug exchange? And being El Salvadorian, non-Mexicans, we can [still] relate to the pain they feel. I think anyone can.”

The stories shared in “One Journey” reflect circumstances affecting the lives of people who may not even know they are being impacted.

“People who are so far from the border always ask, ‘What does that have to do with me?’” de la Riva said. “The thing is the border has begun this whole militarization process that can possibly expand. Juarez is a model for the future of border control, a laboratory for the future, and we can’t allow this kind of effect to happen across our borders.”

The lights dimmed, the audience applauded, and de la Riva stood before the room to deliver her closing words.

“Becoming aware is the most important way to get involved,” she said, “so people can understand the issue to be influenced by it. Everyone’s going to have a different approach — whether artistic, organizational or more political. And that’s the beauty of it. We all have our own way of expressing ourselves and the struggle we pertain to.”

Illustration by Louise Leong.

It is not uncommon to hear, within American politics, rhetoric that demonizes and dehumanizes undocumented workers. It is even more common to hear that undocumented workers are at the crux of many of the economic issues that face the United States. Politicians and pundits spout claims that such workers, often field hands and hard laborers, are stealing jobs from the American public.

And it’s not surprising that this past June, Alabama passed the strictest immigration legislation seen in the United States in an effort to combat the “problem of dealing with illegal immigration” — a problem that Alabama governor Robert Bentley said the federal government has failed to address.

Known as HB 56, the law has been contested and tried, and several components are now being blocked by the federal government, including one provision that would require public K–12 schools to check the citizenship of enrolling students.

As a result of this legislation, undocumented people in Alabama have fled the state in fear of legal backlash, leaving seats in classrooms empty, businesses closed and fields shorthanded.

And where does that leave farms, many of which have relied on the sweat and toil of immigrant workers?

The Associated Press recently reported that farms in rural Alabama are struggling to find laborers who are not only able-bodied but willing to stick with the work. Picking tomatoes, uprooting potatoes and plucking blueberries is thankless, grueling work and the pay for unskilled pickers can seem nonexistent. While a crew of four skilled farmhands can make $150 a day, a recent crew of 25 American workers not only produced less, they earned only about $24 a day.

Such reports only prove the fallacy in claims often touted by politicians: that undocumented workers are a threat to American jobs. While there are — and always will be — American workers willing to take up field work, an overwhelming majority of people tend to deem the work undesirable or prove to be unable to complete the task as well as experienced farmhands can.

Undocumented workers have continually been an economic scapegoat, but the Alabama legislation is only effectively proving the symbiotic relationship that exists between undocumented labor and American agriculture. This relationship, unfair to laborers, is one that has been seen consistently in American history — agricultural business thrives on the backs of the unpaid or underpaid and the overworked. From slavery, to Coolies and cheap labor, to undocumented — and vilified — field workers, American agriculture has become intimately tied to and, unfortunately, reliant on, immigrant workers.

Rhetoric that continues to devalue and dehumanize undocumented workers, depicting them as leeches on a system and a burden to Americans, is not only detrimental but clearly false. The threat to American jobs in the fields is not undocumented workers — it’s American expectations. The work outweighs the pay, and farms are hard-pressed to find American workers who are willing to break their backs for paychecks that don’t reflect the amount of work put in.

The issue of undocumented labor is much more complex and historically rooted than the Alabama legislation recognizes. By alienating people and forcing many to leave the state, Alabama’s government has only proved the inadequacy in our understanding of immigration and the U.S. economy.

Students and the Watsonville Brown Berets want Santa Cruz mayor and UCSC lecturer Ryan Coonerty to support AB 1081, the Trust Act. They staged their protest unannounced in Coonerty’s Law and Democracy class on May 25. Photos by Sal Ingram.

It was a normal Wednesday lecture in Engineering 2 last week. Students discussed their upcoming final with Santa Cruz mayor and lecturer Ryan Coonerty.

Then, around 40 UC Santa Cruz students and Watsonville Brown Beret members unexpectedly entered the classroom. As they circled the room holding signs that read “Shame on you Ryan Coonerty” and “Si con AB 1081,” they addressed Coonerty, then ceded the floor for his response.

On their website, the Watsonville Brown Berets describe themselves as a community force organized to defend and liberate their barrios. Brown Beret members were joined by sympathetic UCSC students as they appealed to Coonerty to support a resolution on AB 1081.

“We feel you acted cowardly,” said Sandino Gomez, a Brown Beret, in a statement addressed to the mayor. “Why did you stand against the resolution?”

AB 1081, known as the Trust Act, focuses on illegal immigration and deportation issues. Under AB 1081, a county can maintain the right to refuse to send fingerprints of all arrested individuals to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Currently, counties are required to send this information to ICE as part of a program known as Secure Communities.

Secure Communities, in correlation with Homeland Security and the Department of Justice, works to identify and deport illegal immigrants. Demonstrators say that according to the policies of Secure Communities, non-criminals are being deported.

“Because of Secure Communities, families are being destroyed,” Gomez said. “Employers are losing employees, partners are losing partners.”

AB 1081 would counteract Secure Communities. A resolution supporting AB 1081 would solidify Coonerty’s support for the bill, but would not make any legislative change.

Coonerty has thus far not decided to voice support for AB 1081.

He told demonstrators his position on the Trust Act is directly related to his belief that it is not a policy the county should be focusing its energy on. Instead, he suggested that the demonstrators engage in a dialogue with government officials at the state and federal level where change would be more effective.

“You can engage in all this rhetoric that is empty, or you can go out and try to change something,” Coonerty said to the demonstrators.

Nonetheless, the demonstrators maintain that what they want from Coonerty is open support of the Trust Act through a resolution — and they want to know why he is choosing not to.

“It’s not enough to say, ‘It’s not my responsibility, not my issue,’” Gomez said. “We’re looking for him to take a symbolic stand. We’re quite aware the resolution is not going to change policy.”

The atmosphere quickly changed when one demonstrator spoke out, cutting off Coonerty.

In response, members of the class began to speak up, reminding the demonstrators that Coonerty had allowed them their chance to speak. Although the demonstrators only remained in the room for approximately 10 minutes, the tension was palpable.

“We came to hold him accountable,” Tomas Alejo, one of the demonstrators, said. “For him not to support our resolution when he had a majority of the community in favor of it is him not paying attention to the values that he preaches.”

Coonerty said for as long as he’s been with the university, he has not seen a protest carried out this way. The protest left Coonerty’s class with mixed feelings.

“A lot of students were aggravated because [Coonerty] was talking about the final,” third-year Maria Isabel Capacete said.

Others were sympathetic to the demonstrators’ cause, but still disagreed with their methods.

“I think the cause they’ve chosen to undertake is an important one,” third-year Guy Herschmann said. “But I think the way they handled it was inappropriate.”

The demonstrators said they were not looking to upset students.

“We don’t want to impact their education in a negative way,” Gomez said. “If anything, our goal was that students would learn something and would perhaps think about the issue in a different light.”

Coonerty explained Santa Cruz has worked on creating and implementing a helpline for immigrant workers, and Santa Cruz is known as a sanctuary city for non-citizens.

“[The Brown Berets and I] have been on the same side on a lot of issues and on different sides on a lot of other issues,” Coonerty said. “Like everything in politics, we don’t always see eye to eye. I respect their passion and I respect the concerns they raise. They are really vital concerns.”

Illustration by Kristian Talley.

Thirty years after she was adopted as an infant from Korea and brought by her parents to the United States, a mother of three in Arizona is facing deportation to Korea, a country she barely knows. Meanwhile, on an Internet message board, a 49-year-old adopted woman is seeking help determining why, after more than 30 years of voting, working and paying taxes in the United States, her request for educational financial aid has been denied and she is being told she is not a citizen.

These two women are among the many who, as the State Department website puts it, “are considered to be foreign-born, non-citizens and do not even know it.”

If the problem of adopted U.S. residents being unaware of their lack of citizenship is significant enough for the federal government to freely admit that many have difficulty finding jobs or even face deportation, it is fair to wonder why more is not being done to remedy this problem.

While it is true that the information is only a Google search away, it is unfair to expect otherwise unaware residents to take these steps to fix a problem they don’t know they have. A simple publicity campaign, a press release or a few commercials alerting the public to this issue might have prevented what the Immigration and Customs Enforcement calls a “large number” of deportations of adoptees who were unaware of their non-citizen status.

Legal residents can be returned to their native countries if convicted of drug possession, prostitution or other similar crimes or if sentenced to serve more than a year of jail time. This looming threat of deportation at even the slightest indiscretion has sparked serious debate over the past few years, especially as the Obama administration has increased the detention and deportation of “criminal aliens,” a term that encompasses many legal residents with low-level drug convictions.

Those unaware of their immigrant status make the decision to smoke marijuana or shoplift with the expectation that, like their peers with legal citizenship, the consequences would at most be brief jail time. Instead, they face deportation.

The case of the Arizona woman facing deportation to Korea, after being convicted of theft, has received significant media coverage. While much attention is paid to the fact that she has children who will go to foster care, and that her criminal acts only barely met the parameters for deportation, disturbingly little concern is given to the side note at the end of the article: Her situation is not unprecedented.

She was not the first, and will certainly not be the last, foreign-born adopted U.S. resident to live much of her adult life under the impression that she was a citizen, because she had been given no reason to assume otherwise.

Journalist Maria Hinojosa was the keynote speaker at the César Chávez Convocation last Thursday night. Photo by Morgan Grana.

Award-winning Mexican-American journalist and author Maria Hinojosa captivated the audience at the Seventh Annual César Chávez Convocation. She touched the crowd with personal stories relating to Latino culture and reiterated the great need for social activism in light of the recently passed laws in Arizona.

Hinojosa helped to honor the memory of one of her heroes, civil rights activist César Chávez, and his formation of the United Farm Workers (UFW) last Thursday at Colleges Nine and Ten. Hinojosa presented Chávez as an example for activists, commending his passion for social justice. Many in the UC Santa Cruz community have taken notice.

“[Maria] asks the difficult and probing questions, and is at the same time dedicated to documenting important issues affecting Latina and Latino communities with a keen sense of compassion and dignity,” said Rosa-Lina Fregoso, professor of Latin American and Latino studies.

Hinojosa is anchor and managing editor of National Public Radio’s (NPR) Latino USA, a weekly national program reporting on news and culture in the Latino community. She also has her own talk show in Boston called “One on One with Maria Hinojosa.”

Hinojosa’s efforts have been recognized by various groups, including the National Council of La Raza, which awarded her the Ruben Salazar Award, and the Hispanic Organization of Latin Actors, which gave her their Lifetime Achievement Award.

At the convocation, she spoke of personal experiences as an immigrant from Mexico and of her struggles growing up in Chicago, Illinois, as well as working as a Latina journalist. She recalled feeling “invisible,” partly because of her ethnicity, but soon discovered the value of her voice as she discovered the power in sharing interviews from individuals whose stories are seldom told.

“My role in journalism was to be visible and not to be quiet,” Hinojosa said.

She has interviewed a wide variety of people throughout her extensive career, including influential politicians, white supremacists, and even gang members. However, she focuses the majority of her attention on stories and issues affecting the Latino community and surrounding immigration rights and reform issues.

Hinojosa also spoke of the need to fight for undocumented people’s rights, especially after the passing of the SB 1070 law and the banning of ethnic studies in the state of Arizona. She said feelings of self-doubt and a lack of belonging are occurring among Latinos in the United States as a result of these current events.

“We are living in a moment of history that is frankly quite devastating,” Hinojosa said in her speech concerning the future of immigrants. “This is a dramatic situation. There’s a lot of ignorance, and this ignorance has been reared into hate. That’s where it gets really ugly.”

Some audience members said that the convocation and the content of Hinojosa’s speaking could not have been more appropriate in light of what is going on in Arizona.

“I thought the event was really inspirational and that the message [Maria] was giving everyone, particularly the youth in the audience, was very motivating,” said Wendy Baxter, associate college administrative officer (ACAO) of co-curricular and college programs at Colleges Nine and Ten. “She stressed the urgent nature of what is going on in this country right now.”

The event attracted many who wanted to honor Chávez and listen to Hinojosa speak.

“This is one of my favorite events that I look forward to all year,” said Helen Shapiro, provost of Colleges Nine and Ten. “The spirit and energy is incomparable.”

The event was planned by Shapiro, College Ten co-curricular programs, the Chicano Latino Resource Center (El Centro), and CARE: Community and Resource Empowerment. The groups shared the task of planning and setting up for the event.

“Everyone was working double and triple-time,” Shapiro said. “I’m pleased people are still working to make this event possible.”

Throughout her speech, Hinojosa continually urged the people in the crowd to continue fighting for immigrants’ rights, and considered the ability to promote dialogue invaluable.

“To be an American is to question and participate,” Hinojosa said. “It is the simple acts of protest that ignite the fire. Activism is organic, you have to trust it.”

Attendees were engaged by Hinojosa’s words and said the journalist related well to the audience.

“I felt really lucky to be there,” Wendy Baxter said. “She was so brilliant and thoughtful and personable, and connected so effectively with all of us. It felt like you were listening to a friend. I think she is something special.”

As the convocation came to a close, Hinojosa stressed the importance and need for openness and compassion in humanity. She said that, when people see each other equality, mutual respect and understanding will be the result.

As she stated, “This is the vision that I have for America with activism that comes from the heart.”

State Senate Bill 1070 has opened up new discussion over old questions about illegal immigration, human and worker’s rights, and AB540 students, both nationwide and in Santa Cruz.

Arizona’s recently-passed SB1070 bill allows police officers to request identification and immigration papers from any person based on probable cause of undocumented status. Opponents are outraged, and the Latino community is particularly vocal in its concerns.

The circulating fear is that the new law will simply encourage officers to stop any nonwhite passersby, effectively allowing for racial profiling.

Watsonville protest raises awreness about Arizona bill SB1070. Photo by Andrew Allio.

A Day for the Workers

A crowd of hundreds watches as a man climbs onstage, and listens as he grips the microphone, screaming, “We have to take the crisis — the attempt to take away our rights in Arizona — as an [opportunity] to fight back and stand up for what we believe in!” Supporters cheer him on, yelling slogans in Spanish and shaking their handmade signs with agitation.

Subsequent speakers acted as if the little time allotted were not enough to convey the importance of the issue at hand. Some forgot to leave space between their mouths and the microphone.

This is the scene at which, once again, people have gathered in Watsonville’s central plaza on May 1 to bring immigration and labor issues to the forefront and call to action California’s own political leaders in response to SB1070. May 1, or May Day — historically known as International Worker’s Day — is celebrated as a holiday in many nations worldwide, but has yet to catch on in the United States.

This year’s turnout in Watsonville was moderate, but as one of the speakers put it, “One person that comes out on May 1 is enough to send a clear and loud message to all the leaders of the world, saying we are sick and tired of laws like SB1070. We are here, and we’re not going anywhere.”

SB1070, the main issue at hand, requires that state agencies enforce federal immigration laws “if reasonable suspicion exists that the person is an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States.”

Antonio Rivas, former mayor of Watsonville and current city councilman, called for a resolution when he spoke at the protest on May Day. He encouraged Watsonville’s city council to politically condemn SB1070.

“We are going to send the message to Arizona that we will not support this legislation,” Rivas announced on the podium. “The city council and the people have to stand together. It’s very important.”

The May Day Summit 2010 draws immigration supporters to UCSC. Photo by Andrew Allio.

May Day Summit 2010

The UC Santa Cruz campus and Student Union Assembly (SUA) also supported their own May Day action in the form of an educational conference called May Day Summit 2010, in which panelists from local groups like the American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) 3299 union and Watsonville Brown Berets spoke about SB1070 and a path forward.

Jonathan Fox, a Latin American and Latino Studies (LALS) professor and panelist at the May Day Summit, said there are reasons why the SB1070 passed specifically in Arizona, and explained that California can choose a different path towards immigration reform.

“Immigrants are less organized or have less elected officials in Arizona, so the [officials in Arizona] didn’t have a lot to fear in electoral terms,” Fox said.

He also pointed out the primary difference between Arizona and California’s electoral base — there is a strikingly larger young voter base in California.

In Arizona, reform towards a more pro-immigrant state is far less attainable than in California. Fox believes it can happen, especially within swing districts. He said it is important to participate in May Day protests and other public actions against political legislation like SB1070, but the main point for him is the importance of a vote — how political energy and passion are turned into power and influence in the political arena.

Claudia Magana, current commissioner of diversity for the SUA and one of May Day Summit’s main organizers, explained that she was excited to see awareness of SB1070 spreading. The bill has awakened outrage from advocates of undocumented immigrants.

“Immigration is the current civil rights movement,” Magana said. “As much as I am angry with Arizona, I want to say ‘thank you’ to them for igniting it.”

Nestor Rivera, an intern for the SUA, said political influence is being exerted through boycotts of Arizona’s businesses. The Santa Cruz city government is also being pushed to remain a sanctuary city, or one that protects undocumented workers. The Santa Cruz community has recently shown concern about the Santa Cruz Police Depatment’s partnership with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), a federal agency that locates, arrests, and deports illegal immigrants.

While the SCPD says that working with ICE is meant only to fight gang violence, many fear the agency will crack down on immigration, threatening Santa Cruz’s status as a sanctuary city.

After UC Berkeley was made a target for ICE raids, Berkeley — like other cities in California — made the switch to be a sanctuary city.

Section 287(g), a section of the Immigration and Nationality Act, says the federal government holds the right to enforce immigration laws, and may do so through local law enforcement agencies.

As a result of Berkeley citizens’ concern over students affected by raids, local agencies ceased to enforce federal immigration laws through section 287(g). This is, however, not a legally-bound promise.

At the 36th “Annual Labor and Immigration: Past and Present” Conference held May 7-8 at Oakes College, Chancellor George Blumenthal explained that AB540 students — undocumented students attending college — are currently under attack, and that has to change.

“We need AB540 students at this school,” Blumenthal said. “Some of them have amazing stories about coming across the border and then achieving success, and I think they should be proud of that.”

Comprehensive Immigration Reform

As a way of addressing the problem, Students Informing Now (SIN), a campus-based group of AB540 undocumented students and their allies, works on gaining legislative support for both the Dream Act and immigration reform. SIN also supports and works toward retaining AB540 students at UCSC.

Michelle Romero, a fourth-year from College Ten, is the current leader of SIN and also works with SUA as its legislative liaison.

“Every day that the federal government does not work to pass immigration reform, a piece of our American fabric unravels,” Romero said. “Things like Arizona’s Senate Bill 1070 pass, and families live in fear of deportation, kids are afraid to go to school, workers work under exploitative conditions, and students without legal authorization can’t work even though they have a diploma.”

At the Summit, Romero spoke mostly about the federal government bill, titled the Comprehensive Immigration Reform for America’s Security Act (CIR ASAP), which was introduced in the House by Rep. Luis V. Gutierrez (D-IL) in December of last year.

CIR ASAP provides for a Southern Border Security Task Force, increased health conditions in detention centers, employment verifications for employers, paths to legalization, an earned adjustment program, and incorporates the Dream Act.

The Dream Act, most important for students, creates an accelerated pathway to legalization for students who have graduated high school and completed at least two years of college, military service or employment.

Author Bill Ong Hing, who also spoke at the Immigration and Labor conference, said in his speech that the compromises made by Congress in CIR ASAP were too conciliatory.

“Senate democrats, their bill — the first two-thirds of it made me throw up,” Ong Hing said. “They are as bad as you can get in terms of — well, they call for a biometric identity card for all of us, high-tech ground sensors, border commission, and doubling of the ICE enforcement budget. And this is from the democratic side of the Senate.”

He did say that the last third part of the bill, mostly attributed to Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ), had good parts to it.

“The question is whether or not the country and U.S. Congress have the stomach to actually push this through,” Ong Hing said.

Monning on Human Rights

Assemblyman Bill Monning of the 27th district, which includes the city of Santa Cruz, also spoke at the conference and said there’s a third piece of the puzzle that nobody is paying attention to.

“Immigration rights, labor rights, and human rights are inseparable,” Monning said.

He explained that the immigrant workforce is a scapegoat for people to blame during this economic recession, as people blame the undocumented for drawing on social services and staying under the radar. In reality though, it’s the reverse.

Undocumented workers often use fake social security numbers to get jobs, which requires that they pay taxes just like every other worker. However, they frequently do not receive social services they are eligible for, out of fear of deportation.

Monning told a story about his work with the California Rural Legal Assistance for the Migrant Farm Worker Project in the early ’80s, and a case he dealt with that sums up the human rights issue.

Salinas Marketing, a local company, had 29 mostly undocumented workers taken into a cauliflower field only a few hours after it had been sprayed with pesticides, regardless of the minimum re-entry level of 36 hours.

“They got knocked down and seriously suffered the poisoning effects of these pesticides,” Monning said.

Only half of them drove to the hospital, while the other half went back to their labor camp, fearing deportation.

“They were all sickened and vomiting,” he continued. “At the hospital, they took [the other half of the workers] out into the parking lot, stripped them of their clothes, men and women and children, and hosed them down with fire hoses like animals to decontaminate them.”

Monning said it was unfortunate that this story is emblematic of a condition that still exists for immigrant farm workers today, and that human rights is an issue that should always be included in legislative reform.

Monning said, “What became clear through all of this was that while labor rights extend to all workers in California and the United States, the undocumented workforce and even those with green cards are compromised in their ability to try and enforce those labor rights.”

Illustration by Louise Leong.

With the flourished scribble of a pen, Arizona Governor Jan Brewer took the topic of immigration reform, already a contentious subject, and turned it into a hotly debated headline that stretched across continents and had cities throughout the United States calling for protests and boycotts. A few hundred miles away, Santa Cruz is a sanctuary city for undocumented immigrants who hope to seek better lives without retribution, and many Santa Cruzans couldn’t help shaking their heads in disdain at the new legislation.

These same people, who are relieved to live far from such rules, are now concerned that a small slice of Arizona may be coming to Santa Cruz.

Residents and politicians alike are apprehensive at the recent announcement that the Santa Cruz Police Department (SCPD) is teaming up with the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Unit (ICE) in response to a spike in gang-related crime in the city over the past year.

The collaboration involves SCPD partnering with ICE’s Community Shield Program, a cooperative effort in which ICE reaches out to law enforcement agencies on the local level. This collaboration provides additional assistance with investigating gang activity and carrying out gang suppression operations. ICE has already joined forces with the Salinas Police Department, the Watsonville Police Department and the Monterey County Sheriff’s Department to curb gang crime, and has implemented its Community Shield Program with cities throughout the United States.

To the undocumented community and its supporters, ICE — or “La Migra,” as it is often called — is an unwelcome sight in many neighborhoods. The agency is notorious for conducting raids on schools and workplaces, during which ICE rounds up suspected undocumented immigrants and deports them back to their home countries without regard for the fact that it may break up families.

Although the SCPD has stated that ICE is not here to deal with “petty immigration violations,” residents still have cause for concern, due to the federal agency’s reputation for targeting the undocumented, regardless of whether or not they have a criminal background.

In order to pacify the unease of legal and illegal residents of Santa Cruz, the SCPD needs to meet with the community and clearly distill the reasoning behind ICE’s presence and the activities it will be carrying out. It should also continuously update the City Council and the media through meetings and press releases about any local incidents that ICE gets involved in.

It is essential that the SCPD increase its outreach to the Chicano community. We must provide bilingual information about the joint effort with ICE to curb gang violence.

Transparency and accountability are necessary to assure residents that ICE is here to target violent gang members and not undocumented immigrants with clean criminal records. If people are dubious as to whether or not ICE is being kept in check in Santa Cruz, it could cause a whirlwind of controversy that nobody wants to see.

While Santa Cruz could stand to benefit from extra assistance in pulling violent gang members off the streets, the same cannot be said about targeting innocent undocumented immigrants, who consider the city a haven from persecution. Community members need to keep their guard up and serve not only as extra eyes and ears for criminal activities by gang members, but also pay attention to the potential criminality against Santa Cruz’s sanctuary city status that could occur if ICE’s activity is not monitored carefully.

Illustration by Patrick Yeung.

Troubled by the increase of violent crimes in Santa Cruz, the Santa Cruz Police Department (SCPD) is filling eight officer positions and bringing in the help of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

The City Council made an emergency decision last Tuesday night to fill eight police officer slots, previously vacated because of retirements.

This decision was made despite the strain it could put on the budget with its approximated $1 million cost, according to Councilmember Tony Madrigal.

“There has always been a need to fill all the vacancies, and the recent riot, the violent destruction downtown, and recent killings added an even greater sense of urgency to the council’s decision,” Madrigal said.

Madrigal said the council is making plans to discuss how to pay for these officers. “Now more than ever, our council is going to take a serious look at … ballot measures in the next year to ask voters if they would approve a tax increase to pay for the added expense,” he said.

SCPD spokesperson Zach Friend explained the important improvements that eight more police officers can bring to Santa Cruz.

“The eight additional officers will allow us to increase the amount of officers downtown and in the gang unit,” he said.

Eight police officers were on duty during the night of the infamous riot, a number that some say illustrates the need to fill the vacancies as quickly as possible.

In 2000, the SCPD peaked with a force of 104 officers, which has since fallen to 87.

The decrease in officers coincided with an increase in 911 calls — 85,774 in 2009, up 25 percent from 2006.

In addition to hiring eight new officers, the SCPD also recently announced a new partnership with ICE to control gang crime, a move that has many in the community feeling apprehensive.

ICE will be in Santa Cruz to “augment the numbers and investigative skills of our gang unit,” Friend said.

Doug Keenan, director of the Santa Cruz County Immigration Project (SCCIP), works with people living in Santa Cruz County who wish to become citizens by providing legal services such as naturalization, appeals, and waivers.

He questioned the benefits that will emerge from this relationship between the SCPD and ICE, and is concerned about the impact it could have on undocumented immigrants.

“I’m not sure exactly how this partnership will work,” Keenan said. “Will it lead to raids and sweeps? Will it increase the anxiety and level of mistrust between the police and the community? An end to gang violence is something that we all want to see … but I don’t know what ICE adds to the effort.”

Tony Madrigal also questioned the role ICE will play, and how wise it is to give them a presence in Santa Cruz — a sanctuary city.

“People are calling, asking me ‘Will I get stopped on the street? Why are they here specifically? Will they be doing immigration sweeps because they happen to already be here?’” Madrigal said.

After hearing these concerns, Zach Friend asserted that ICE will not spend its time in Santa Cruz pursuing anything that does not pertain to gangs.

“[ICE] is here to deal with gang-related crimes, not to deal with petty immigration violations,” he said.

Friend went on to point out the benefits of ICE, explaining that most gang members in Santa Cruz belong to a much larger web, with national or even international connections, and having federal resources on-hand will be a huge help.

Madrigal is of a similar opinion. However, he expressed concern with the level of communication between the police and the community.

“A simple explanation by the police, in English and Spanish, could help a lot to promote more cooperation, trust, and willingness to call in with information,” Madrigal said. “There’s a willingness to cooperate that we continuously want to strengthen and foster with everyone in the community, regardless of their legal immigration status.”

Regardless of how many new officers the SCPD hires, or how effective the ICE partnership turns out to be, Madrigal said that the community must work together to make a more secure future.

“We are not going to stop the violence by simply dividing people,” he said. “We need to be looking out for one another and not be fearful of each other.”

Illustration by Megan Laird.

“I don’t know what an illegal immigrant looks like”— those were the words of Arizona Governor Jan Brewer last week. Nevertheless, Brewer and the Arizona legislature asked police all over the state to make that distinction daily by passing SB 1070, which requires police to check the immigration status of every person they “reasonably suspect” could be living in the United States illegally, when “practicable.” When the law goes into effect in a few months, it will essentially legalize racial profiling.

Brewer and other lawmakers claim that SB1070 will be enforced without regard to skin color, but the law offers no criteria on which to determine reasonable suspicion of illegality. Many laws rely on probable cause, but those laws punish an actual criminal activity, such as driving under the influence, an act that produces clues and evidence for police to judge by.

What type of activity can police use to determine if a person is an illegal immigrant? As vehemently as supporters of the bill claim it isn’t racist, they have failed to provide any legal way to determine suspicion except the general stereotypes of appearance and economic status.

This bill, when put into practice, is likely to violate the civil rights of untold numbers of Americans whom police suspect to be in the country illegally because of the color of their skin or attire. The Fourth Amendment promises protection from unreasonable search and seizure, but whether the law will be deemed unconstitutional by courts remains to be seen. Meanwhile, many Latino Arizonans who are living in the country legally are likely to undergo harassment on account of their race.

Not only will this law compromise individual liberties, it will create an atmosphere of fear that will threaten public safety and reduce the quality of life. Undocumented people will be less likely to report domestic abuse if they are just as likely as their abuser to be arrested. People will be afraid to report crime in their neighborhoods because the police will be required to check their immigration status. This law pits police against the community at a time when they should be working more closely than ever to bring safety to every neighborhood. The job of the police should be to protect residents of the state when they are in danger, regardless of their race or immigration status. For this reason, many police chief associations have opposed the bill.

President Obama has spoken out and called this law “misguided,” — the perfect way to describe it. Arizona has the most illegal border crossings, and violence from Mexican drug cartels and smuggling has begun to seep over the border. Recently, a 58-year-old rancher was shot and the footsteps traced back to the border. Today, 70 percent of likely voters in the state support the immigration law. The problems of illegal immigration in Arizona are legitimate, but this law criminalizes an entire ethnic group, forcing police to make judgments based on appearance and arrest people who are not engaged in any otherwise criminal or dangerous activity. This is not a job for local police officers who should be stopping real criminals — murderers, thieves and drug dealers — instead of checking someone’s immigration papers.

Arresting an entire ethnicity will not solve the problem of illegal immigration.

Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis once said that the states are laboratories for democracy, testing out policies that may work for the entire nation. Jon Stewart recently joked that Arizona must be the “meth lab” of democracy. But as easy as it is to make light of this law which many see as ridiculous, we must remember that for many people it will mean living in constant fear. The huge state in which police officers will have a huge amount of personal discretion and power.

Arizona’s new legislation shows that if the federal government delays much longer in producing meaningful immigration reform, the price we pay may be our constitutional rights. Meanwhile, when we hear lawmakers from Arizona harping on the importance of liberty, we should remember how quick they are to deprive others of the freedom of walking down the street without identification papers, or calling the police to report a robbery without having to fear for their own arrest.

Eager participants at the Immigration and Citizenship Seminar, held at Lady Star of the Sea Church last Sunday, had the opportunity to learn about the citizenship process from legal professionals. Photo by Morgan Grana.

With microphone in hand, City Councilmember Tony Madrigal welcomed crowd members in exuberant Spanish, high-fiving people in the front row and smiling at the small children who roamed the parish hall while their parents sat, waiting expectantly.

The occasion was the 7th annual Free Immigration and Citizenship Forum, held at the Lady Star of the Sea Church last Sunday, Oct. 18, from 2 p.m. to 6 p.m.

Madrigal and the Community Information Center for Migrant Assistance (CIMA) organized the event. A multitude of people gathered in the small parish hall, sacrificing their Sunday to find out more about the few ways they can become a legal citizen of America more quickly.

Despite the grave circumstances, everyone seemed to be smiling, gossiping and talking with one another as if they were one very large family.

In the back of the hall, a panel of 12 lawyers sat at individual booths, prepared to spend three hours offering guidance counseling, hoping to lead their clients in the right direction towards citizenship.

“It’s something the community has grown to expect now and I get asked about it every year,” Madrigal said. “‘When’s it coming? When’s it coming?’ People get excited about it.”

The event began with a short PowerPoint presentation given by one of the lawyers on the panel for free consultation, Guerrero Vilma.

“We present it in order to dispel rumors,” Vilma said. “One of the main misconceptions is that people think it’s a lot easier to gain residency than it actually is. They say, ‘I’ve waited 10 years and still haven’t gotten my papers, there must be something wrong.’ But we know that 10 years is normal, and that it might be fifteen.”

Madrigal agreed.

“A lot of people think it’s just an easy process, but the steps are really complicated and not everybody knows where to turn to, and if we’re able to line up a dozen lawyers to steer them in the right direction, that’s a good first step.”

Vilma pointed out that many people who are not connected with the issue of immigration do not realize or appreciate how long and hard the process is to become a citizen in the United States. She said many immigrants have little to no idea about the nature of the operation.

“Education is key. People need to know where they stand, what they do or do not qualify for,” she said.

After Vilma’s speech ended, people began taking numbers and standing in line to speak with a lawyer. Tony Madrigal stood up front with the microphone again and asked, “¿Están listos para la consulta?” — “Are you ready for consultation?” Which was met with an enthusiastic “Si!”

Overall, the mood in the parish hall was one of lending a hand and helping people in need. Unfortuantely, though, some of those who attended the forum said a helpful spirit can be hard to find for immigrants, with fraudulent lawyers known to give misleading counsel.

“People get a lot of bad advice,” Vilma said. “It’s important they get the right information so that they can assess their situation and make an informed decision.”

For Madrigal, this was one of the main reasons he started the free legal forum in the first place.

“There are certain immigration consultants that are out to scam,” he said. “People need to be aware of that. I mean, they don’t know what they’re doing, and the lawyers are feeding them false hopes.”

Illustration by Justin Martinez.

With a recent peak of interest in immigrant and labor issues spurred by the contract resolution of UC workers in early February, local May Day celebrations will ensure that this important day is not overlooked. Events planned for the week of May 1, which is known as International Workers’ Day, will serve as a testament to the social and economic achievements of the labor movement.

Locally, the May 1 festivities will be centered on marches and rallies for immigrant and worker rights, starting at UC Santa Cruz in the Quarry Plaza and ending at San Lorenzo Park. The marches have been a May Day and Labor Day tradition for 119 years and serve to inform the Santa Cruz community about the current labor issues.

Laura Barringer, a third-year feminist studies major from College Ten, is a member of the Movement for Immigrant Rights Alliance. Barringer has been involved in the labor movement since her senior year of high school. 

“The recent May Day marches have brought critical attention to the issues that immigrant communities and working communities are facing, and mass awareness is the first step to making change,” Barringer said.

Locally, Santa Cruz citizens and students participating in the rallies will be protesting the budget cuts to workers and students in underrepresented and marginalized communities, and protesting the deportations and foreclosures.

Also on May 1, the Reel Works Film Festival, which began in late April, will continue with a film screening at the Watsonville City Plaza of a work entitled “Golden Lands, Working Hands.” The film is a reflection on California’s history through the perspectives of working people, and has a focus on farm workers and teacher organization. 

The director of “Golden Lands, Working Hands,” Fred Glass, is a labor history instructor at San Francisco City College as well as a communications director for the California Federation of Teachers. Glass expressed that a film screening is a powerful way to recognize the labor movement’s influence and to educate people on the history of labor rights.

“I made [the film] because labor history is an underground and unknown history,” Glass said. “Working people are the overwhelming majority of the nation and the world.”

Reel Works will also feature UCSC alumni and student films throughout the ongoing festival, which ends May 4. The student films will encompass all different aspects of labor issues. 

The California Faculty Association and the Student California Teachers Association are sponsoring the Reel Works Film Festival for the second year in a row. These organizations are deeply rooted in the importance of educating the public about the labor movement.

“Both organizations feel strongly that we need more education about labor struggles in the United States and around the world,” said Jennifer Colby, Ph.D. lecturer for the liberal studies and service learning institutes at CSU Monterey Bay. “The Reel Works film festival provides an opportunity to see the most recent films that document these struggles.”

Colby feels that especially during the economic crisis universities are facing, teachers and students alike are experiencing labor issues firsthand.

“Teachers and professors are workers too,” Colby said. “We work for the state of California, so today we have very special needs in the face of budget cuts.”

In addition to those special needs, Barringer spoke of the broader issues that motivate her activism for the cause of labor rights.

“I am involved because I believe that we are a nation of immigrants and, in the end, we are living on stolen land,” Barringer said. “So how can we have a debate over which human beings are legal and which ones are not?”

Writer and director Cary Fukunaga talks about his debut feature film, “Sin Nombre,” which won the U.S. Dramatic Directing Award at this year’s Sundance. The film opens Friday. Photo by Conner Ross.

Sitting in his socks, on an ottoman in a Ritz Carlton suite in downtown San Francisco, Cary Fukunaga speaks modestly about his film “Sin Nombre.” 

“My first film, my first script,” said the 31-year-old UC Santa Cruz alumnus. “It is what it is in its own little imperfect way. I mean, I could have kept working on it forever, but you just got to stop at some point.”

Fukunga’s efforts won him the U.S. Dramatic Directing Award for the film at this year’s Sundance Film Festival, as well as the Excellence in Cinematography Award. 

After graduating from UCSC in 1999 with a B.A. in history, Fukunaga went on to attend film school at New York University, where he would perfect his dual crafts of writing and directing. For his second-year project, Fukunaga focused on the real-life plight of a group of Mexican immigrants who were deserted in a locked truck and suffocated after illegally crossing the border. The short film, “Victoria Para Chino,” won more than two dozen international awards, as well as a Student Academy Award at Sundance in 2005.

“‘Victoria’ floored me,” said Rosalee Cabrera, director of the Chicano Latino Resource Center. “The way he communicates the reality of people is very harsh. You can’t watch it and not have your humanity jarred.” 

Following the success of the short, Fukunaga was asked to submit a script to the Sundance Lab. This intense workshop program led him to create “Sin Nombre,” his NYU thesis and first feature film.

“Sin Nombre,” written in Spanish, tells the story of Sayra, a Honduran girl who migrates with her uncle and father to Tapachula, Mexico. There she meets Casper, a Tapachulan gang member. Seeking a better life in the United States, the two join other immigrants as they migrate through Mexico atop trains.

To research for the film, Fukunaga traveled alongside immigrants on trains through Mexico, an experience he says he couldn’t have written or directed the film without.

“Some bandits attacked our train the first night,” Fukunaga said. “I found out much later that they killed a Guatemalan immigrant on the train and threw him off.”

Fukunaga and his cast and crew spent a total of four weeks in Mexico City and over two weeks on the road heading south to the Guatemalan border to shoot the movie. 

“It was really cool for the towns to have a film shoot come there where real immigrants were traveling, and for the crew to see that what we were doing was so close to reality,” Fukunaga said. “People confusing cast and crew for real immigrants was a funny, curious event.” 

While the film focuses on immigration, Fukunga insists that “Sin Nombre” was not made with a political agenda in mind. Instead, he said that his intent was to create empathy for both the good and bad characters in the story while sharing the experience of a journey with viewers.

“It is a human story about immigration,” said Maurice Peel, the advertising and publicity manager at the Nickelodeon Theater. “It didn’t feel like it had an imposed political message.” 

Despite his reservations about attaching any political commentary to the film, Fukunaga did voice support for the UC system’s practice of allowing undocumented students to pay in-state tuition under Assembly Bill 540. 

“I used to mentor kids in L.A. and there were so many issues with them not being able to get any kind of financial aid to go to school, even though they lived their entire lives in L.A.,” Fukunaga said. “They definitely weren’t Mexican anymore, and then suddenly they found they couldn’t get financial aid to go to school. Where else can they go?” 

Fukunga said his next film will probably depart from the socially conscious nature. He spoke of a desire to do something in an entirely different genre — even sci-fi.

He also hinted at the possibility of doing a musical with Zachary Condon of Beirut, describing the story as a “two guys in love with one girl — classic love triangle.” Additionally, he is currently writing an “unrequited love story” that was inspired by his life in the College Eight dorms during his first year at UCSC. 

Fukunaga, whose mother is Swedish and father is Japanese, hopes he will be able to make movies around the world. 

“I’m not opposed to doing another Spanish-language film,” said Fukunaga, whose third language is Spanish — French, which he studied at UCSC and while studying in France his third year, is his second. “I just don’t even think about the borders really. I mean, if I see a cool story taking place somewhere, I do my best to learn the language.” 

—–

“Sin Nombre” opens at the Nickelodeon Theater this Friday.