According to Alonzo's research, things were even more dire in the East. "The following year, in North Carolina," she wrote, "farm officials set up a statewide hotline to fill crop and livestock jobs. Two calls were received."
Things have only gotten worse with anti-immigrant legislation.
In 2007, more than 90,000 migrants fled Oklahoma, causing a loss of $1.9 billion to the state's economy. Since passage of SB 1070, Arizona has shed 200,000 migrants, who fled to friendlier states.
Agriculture is the largest sector in Georgia's economy, yet lawmakers passed stiff anti-immigrant legislation projected to cost the state $391 million in lost crops. The governor suggested that farmers hire ex-cons to work the fields. The ex-cons refused. More than 70 percent of Georgia's restaurants had labor shortages and lost, on average, $21,000 per eating establishment.
Last year Alabama one-upped Arizona and passed a tougher, meaner anti-immigrant measure.
Research at the University of Alabama said the state could lose up to $10.8 billion and 140,000 jobs.
The governor demanded that the statehouse reconsider. Alabama legislators responded by making the law tougher.
Why, in the middle of a recession, would statehouses vote to cripple their economies by driving Mexicans to flee?
Why, with President Obama deporting more Latinos than at any time in the nation's history, would legislators demand local cops inspect citizenship papers?
The inescapable answer: Race!
The guiding proponent of these statutes is Kris W. Kobach, who helped author SB 1070.
At the time, Kobach was senior counsel to the legal arm of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR).
In 1986, John Tanton, FAIR's founder, wrote: "As whites see their power and control over their lives declining, will they simply go quietly into the night? Or will there be an explosion?"
Not surprisingly, the Southern Poverty Law Center called FAIR a racially driven organization.
Alabama's copycat legislation was penned by state Sen. Scott Beason, who has called blacks "aborigines" and declared that when it came to immigration, folks ought to "empty the clip."
In Arizona the bill drafted by Kobach was sponsored by then–state Sen. Russell Pearce.
In 2006, Pearce forwarded to his followers a screed he'd read titled "Who Rules America." The essay took exception to race mixing and a "world in which every voice proclaims the equality of races, the inerrant nature of the Jewish 'Holocaust' tale, the wickedness of attempting to halt the flood of non-White aliens pouring across our borders."
The essay, which originated from a neo-Nazi newsletter, went on to ask: "And who are these all-powerful masters of the media?"
The answer was obvious: "As we shall see, to a very large extent they are Jews."
Eerily, the message Pearce forwarded to political supporters in 2006 foreshadowed coming bloodshed.
"On the other hand, a White racist — that is, any racially conscious White person who looks askance at miscegenation or at the rapidly darkening racial situation in America — is portrayed, at best, as a despicable bigot who is reviled by the other characters, or, at worst, as a dangerous psychopath who is fascinated by firearms and is a menace to all law-abiding citizens," read Pearce's send-along.
Last month, Pearce acolyte J.T. Ready slaughtered his girlfriend, her daughter and boyfriend and a 16-month-old child before turning the gun on himself.
Ready was a neo-Nazi who was photographed at white supremacist rallies in full National Socialist regalia. Following the passage of SB 1070, Ready formed an armed militia that hunted Mexicans in southern Arizona.
After the multiple homicides, Pearce tried to distance himself from Ready. This sleight-of-hand was complicated for Pearce: He'd endorsed Ready's failed run for the Mesa City Council and, in fact, had ordained Ready into the priesthood of the Mormon faith and attended his baptism.
These, then, are the miscreants who have stirred this nation's darkest prejudices.
None of this was grist to the Supreme Court. The Obama administration opted to argue only the narrowest of issues: State immigration laws trample federal domain. With an election looming, the president chose not to confront nativist anxiety.
Latino groups and civil rights organizations have filed lawsuits that challenge what Obama ducked. These suits recount what happens on American streets when brown people are detained, when Mexicans and Central Americans are crowded into detention centers, when families are ripped apart.
When law enforcement cordons off brown communities, the law, as applied, is apartheid.
Perhaps you can understand, after a wave of hateful legislation and a galling discussion by justices and attorneys in the country's highest court, why there are those not content with jurisprudence.
You see, all this legal eloquence comes after generations of families picked crops on their way to citizenship, only to encounter lawyers and lawmakers who are worse than any field boss.
Monica Alonzo's father crossed the border from Mexico. His family worked in the cotton fields. They earned less, picked more and kept their mouths shut. Kids in school were slapped if they were overheard speaking Spanish.
"They mistreated the Mexicans the worst in El Mirage," Alonzo says. "Mexicans went straight to jail or were roughed up for minor offenses.
"They were made to feel like worthless people," she recalls. "Many Mexicans instilled in their children the importance of speaking only English. Not in my house. For my father, the treatment created a lot of resentment toward whites. We weren't allowed to speak English at home for some time. We would get in trouble if he knew we were mixing with the Anglos."
I first want to commend Mr. Lacey on an article that takes bravery to write. From what I have read from the comments below you are proved right Mr. Lacey The anti latino sentiment has gone too far. It's scary to read comments from people calling immigrants "turds" ( one because I fear that a junior high student is writing it and that's why they couldn't come up with a better insult) Thank you Mr. Lacey from a legal Mexican American.
That the stupiest article I have ever read! Those illegal turds don't belong here and they are breaking/disrespecting the law.
A buddy's mother makes $65 every hour on the computer. She has been without a job for seven months but last month her payment was $14505 just working on the computer for a few hours. Read more on this web site lazycash42.c()m
what George replied I'm amazed that anyone able to earn $5349 in one month on the internet. did you see this site lazycash42.c()m
I came to this country legally in 1953,and you can word it any way you want but if some one enters this country illegal he has broken our laws and is classified as a criminal.As for picking on the brown Latinos as you say,what do you expect when 90% of the illegals are Latinos,if our southern neighbor was Africa chances are 90% of the illegals would be Black. I don't care if their is 100 or 11 million if their here Illegally throw them out
i agree with everything Forums4Justice said. i am fith generation hispanic and i don't have a problem with the police stopping me and checking my id what is the big deal, and i am so tired of them always saying they are going to pick on only the mexicans well in california we have illegal mexican, asians and middle easterns living here. if they are here illegally they ALL have to go/ i pray the supreme court uphold Arizona immigration laws
as Frances said I am dazzled that anyone able to get paid doller5846 in four weeks on the internet. have you read website lazycash42.c()m lazycash42.c()m lazycash42.c()m
"... commenters here only confirm their own gutless hatred and the bigoted motivation behind these 'laws.'" TRANSLATION: I don't like it that lots of people want immigration and employment regulations enforced.
We, the people, do not care what race, nationality, ethnicity, religion, or color, someone is, if they are here illegally, they have absolutely no right to be in our United States, let alone working, in our United States. We, the people, don't care about political parties, or their platforms, We, the people want our existing federal laws, against illegal immigration, enforced. We, the people, by a very large majority, want ALL illegal immigrants, out of our United States.
Mr. Lacey has played very loose with the facts in an effort to spin an argument, against enforcement of current immigration laws, that most American voters simply won't buy. The most glaring of his substantive misrepresentations are 1) "Roughly 22 percent of all deportees were forced to abandon children - children who are American citizens," and 2) "What SB 1070 does is criminalize the undocumented." Both these assertions are patently false. Every illegal alien deportee is free to take his children back to his country of origin. Any illegal aliens who would be prevented from doing so by their home countries would be granted residency rights on humanitarian/undue hardship grounds. Further, enacted portions of SB 1070 do not create new categories of criminal conduct for the undocumented. Breaking and entering into the U.S., using stolen Social Security numbers and forged documents, engaging in tax fraud and driving without a license were all illegal activities before Arizona ever took steps to crack down on people who have no business being here.
Find everything you're looking for in your city
Find the best happy hour deals in your city
Get today's exclusive deals at savings of anywhere from 50-90%
Check out the hottest list of places and things to do around your city
