Filtering by
- Resource Type: Text
Sanctuary jurisdictions are jurisdictions that do not enforce one or more aspects of federal immigration policy in regards to unauthorized immigrants. Some states maintain state-wide sanctuary policies while others are adamantly against them. Estimates of taxes that unauthorized immigrants pay and estimates of the amount of state funding that unauthorized immigrants can access (education, financial aid, corrections, and welfare) reveal that regardless of sanctuary status, unauthorized immigrants may “pay in” more than they “take out” from the system. The status of “sanctuary jurisdiction” does not appear to have much if any effect on the net state budget. However, unauthorized immigrants are able to access more welfare programs in sanctuary states.
Passed in April of 2010, Arizona Senate Bill 1070 is nationally recognized as the first state-level anti-immigration legislation of its kind that deputized local police officers to enforce immigration laws. Though response strategies varied widely across activists and organizations, many community organizations devised strategies specifically aimed to protect and assist the undocumented community during the reign of terror that accompanied SB 1070. In looking at the reflections of activists and organization leaders on their own actions and decision-making rationale, I analyze how their strategies and tactics worked to both counter and reconceptualize hegemonic notions of citizenship, belonging, and community through the creation of networks and knowledge funds. By specifically examining the efforts made by No Mas Muerte, Puente Human Rights Movement, and the Calle Dieciseis Mural Project, I show that efforts that go beyond voter mobilization and legal action, which not only work to combat dominant rhetoric but also center the voices of the targeted population through disrupting public space, are essential to responding to political efforts designed to target vulnerable communities. Given their necessity, academics and institutional actors must acknowledge the importance of grassroots efforts in contributing to inter-institutional strategies and ensure that a ground-up analysis of community-based organizations informs their actions taken against state-level anti-immigration laws.
Attaining educational equity had been one of the immigration related barriers faced by undocumented immigrants in the State of Arizona since the early 2000s. In 2006, Arizona voters passed Proposition 300 which prohibited anyone who is not a U.S. citizen or a legal permanent resident from receiving instate tuition and additional state-funded assistance for educational costs in Arizona (Prop 300 Legislative Analysis). In 2018, the Arizona Supreme Court deemed students under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program ineligible for instate tuition and state financial aid. But it sparked a momentum IN 2018 from Aliento, a non- profit community based organization in Arizona. Their mission was to attain access to instate tuition and state-funded scholarships for all regardless of immigration status. The main goals of this study are to highlight how the historical win of Proposition 308 was made possible, through an analysis of the extensive strategies utilized by Aliento to get it on the midterm ballot and secondly, to inform potential beneficiaries. This study provides a descriptive analysis of the tactics utilized throughout Aliento’s instate tuition campaigns to get Proposition 308 on the midterm ballot and its successful win in the November 8, 2022 midterm election. Specifically, it will apply the Community Power Building Approach to analyze three main tactics utilized by Aliento to pass Prop 308. This study demonstrates how undocumented and DACAmented people in Arizona, who cannot vote or participate in the electoral process, mobilized and got Prop 308 on the ballot. Their tactics were successful in attaining educational equity in the State of Arizona.