In the Old Testament, God punished the Israelites by forcing them to aimlessly wander the desert for 40 years. In America, we punish our elderly by forcing them to aimlessly wander Scottsdale Condominiums, their only escape being death or another John McCain election push. To see Arizona as something more than desert, canyons and tallboy cans of iced tea is to view the world through red-white-and-blue tinted glasses.
And yet here stands the Copper State at the pinnacle of widespread political controversy, thanks in large part to Gov. Jan Brewer’s recent signing of Arizona SB1070. The bill, which we should all be somewhat familiar with by now, takes an unprecedented stance in the “fight” against illegal immigration, and has been the source for serious debate regarding racial profiling and federal immigration policy.
Because of the controversial nature of the bill — and the near-foreign language used in writing any piece of legislation — there’s been a flood of news stories and articles with different takes as to what the bill actually allows law enforcement to do. At one extreme are those who feel the law brings Arizona to the doorstop of fascist Germany, where the police act as an unchecked power and “papers” are more valuable than vital organs. Opposing that viewpoint are those who feel the law does nothing more than codify, at a state level, what the federal government should’ve been doing for years.
The truth is somewhere in the middle. And yet, whether SB1070 is eventually found unconstitutional or not, the one unavoidable truth is that this bill creates a massive rift between those living illegally in Arizona and those employed by the state to protect them (and, yes, law enforcement is responsible for protecting illegal immigrants from harm). Crimes like theft and domestic abuse, which are already underreported among minorities, could drop to almost negligible levels in the illegal immigrant community if they feel any contact with law enforcement equates to deportation. The bill may be known as the “Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act,” but it does nothing to make the many neighborhoods of illegal immigrants safer. And whether we like it or not, those neighborhoods aren’t going away, and they deserve the preservation of basic safety.
While the long-term fate of this legislation lies in the courts, its short-term well-being is at the mercy of public opinion, which has inevitably led to cries of protests and boycotts. Already, conventions have pulled out of Phoenix, and the state’s tourism board has gone on the defensive. But the most interesting boycott, and the one that could get the most coast-to-coast attention, is that against the Arizona Diamondbacks, the state’s Major League Baseball club.
Obviously, neither Justin Upton, nor any player on the Diamondbacks, played a role in the passage of SB1070. And yet, as a professional sports team from Arizona, they will be forced to bear the brunt of anger from 18+ other cities they visit over the course of the summer. In the April 23 edition of The Progressive, Dave Zirin stated the team no longer exists to him, and will cease to exist until the law is repealed. If this boycott does indeed translate into rows of empty seats in Phoenix’s Chase Field, it could seriously affect the organization — though not the players or the executives, of course. Instead, all a boycott does is squeeze out those on the bottom rungs: the low-level team employee and the stadium janitor (who could possibly be an illegal immigrant himself).
At the same time, Major League Baseball is an organization that prides itself deeply on its commitment to social and racial change in this country, and with a large contingent of Hispanic and Latin American players, enough pressure could force the league to (if nothing else) speak out against the bill. Figures like Jackie Robinson — who’s almost sickeningly pimped out by the Commissioner’s Office — and Roberto Clemente not only represent integrity and talent, but also the front lines in public acceptable of African and Latin American people. Baseball does not want to lose the support of the Hispanic and Latin communities. And Arizona does not want to lose the support of baseball.
It will be interesting to see if this boycott is able to sustain itself. According to the AP, there were around 40 protesters outside Wrigley Field Wednesday as the Diamondbacks laid waste to the Cubs, 13-5. In addition to the team boycott, a New York congressman has already called for a boycott of the 2011 All-Star Game in Phoenix. Major League Baseball does not control the Arizona legislature, but it does control its All-Star games, and if the outcry (or, more importantly, the financial risk) exists, we could see an extraordinary melding of politics and sports.
Until then, I’ll continue my boycott of the Arizona Diamondbacks, which began the day they opened play with a retractable roof stadium and those terrifying purple and teal uniforms.
Sean Kittridge ([email protected]) is a senior majoring in journalism.
