8 things you can do right now in Kent County to be in solidarity with immigrant communities
The Trump Administration is continuing to expand the role and function of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), which is causing tremendous panic in immigrant communities, even fueling xenophobic hatred that resonates with his base of supporters.
Last week Trump announced his intent to use the prison at Guantanamo Bay as an addition place to detain undocumented immigrants. Drop Site News reported on this dynamic and noted that the Biden Administration had paved the way for Trump to use the prison at Guantanamo Bay for this purpose.
In addition, the Trump Administration is developing allies in Latin America, specifically in Panama and El Salvador, as Democracy Now! Has reported.
While it is difficult to have an impact on the anti-immigration policies that involve other countries, we can take steps to do things right here in West Michigan to practice solidarity with affected communities.
- People, particularly allies, should follow Movimiento Cosecha GR, learn from them and support their work, both in person, and financially.
- Those of us who are NOT part of the affected communities, need to find ways to center their voices and their live experiences and not make it about us and what we think is best for those who are being targeted by ICE.
- People should follow GR Rapid Response to ICE, which is Cosecha’s partner organization, which does the defensive work to try and minimize the harm that is being done to immigrant communities. Follow them on Facebook, communicate with them via info@grrapidsreponsetoice.org, and attend one of their monthly trainings. As of right now, the February and March trainings are booked, so be patient with that group as they are an all volunteer organization that has no funding.
- Support the ongoing efforts of Movimiento Cosecha and GR Rapid Response to ICE to get the City of Grand Rapids, the Grand Rapids Public Schools and Kent County to adopt Sanctuary policies. Attend the Kent County Commission meeting on Thursday, February 13th at 8:30am.
- There are Action Alerts for each of these three governing bodies, which you can sign here. For Kent County, for the City of Grand Rapids, and for the Grand Rapids Public Schools.
- If you are part of a faith community, you can declare yourself as Sanctuary and publicly defy the Trump Administration’s plans to engage in mass deportation. GR Rapid Response to ICE has people who have been part of the Sanctuary Movement and can assist in the process of being a Sanctuary. Here are some toolkits for faith communities who are interested in becoming a Sanctuary.
https://neumc-email.brtapp.com/files/fileshare/sanctuary+movement+toolkit+(umc).pdf
https://www.uua.org/files/pdf/s/sanctuary-toolkit-2017.pdf
7. People can also support the Kent Community I-Bond Fund, which provides funds to bond people out of detention while they are waiting for a court date. You can donate to this fund by making checks out to I-Bond Fund Joy Like a River — Kent I bond Fund and mailing them to 33 College Ave Se, Grand Rapids, MI 49503.
8. You can assist GR Rapid Response to ICE with distributing, “What to Do if ICE shows Up”, cards. These cards, which are in Spanish and English, provide tips to immigrants on what to do when ICE shows up, plus there is a phone number that they can call if they want people who have been trained to mobilize and prevent ICE from arresting, detaining and deporting those in the affected community. 616-238-0081 This number is only to be used by those in the affected community that are being approached by ICE at their home, workplace, etc.
Lastly, you can learn more about the history of US immigration policy. GR Rapid Response to ICE provides presentations and classes for groups that want to explore this history, which is rooted in discrimination and xenophobia. Contact GR Rapids Response to ICE if you are interested at info@grrapidsreponsetoice.org
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) was created in March of 2003. ICE has had a physical presence in Kent County for 20 years, with numerous offices and partners, as is shown in the graphic below.
People first discovered that Kent County had a contract with ICE in the Spring of 2018. That contact, which is linked here, was created in July of 2012, during the Obama Administration. We later found out that when it was being debated at the Kent County Commission meeting, only one commissioner objected to the contract.
The Kent County Sheriff’s Department renewed the ICE contract in 2017, with the extension date continuing until September 30th, 2019.
We also discovered that the Kent County Sheriff at that time, Larry Stelma, signed onto a letter from the National Sheriff’s Association (NSA), a letter dated March of 2018, which said in part:
Congress must act to pass legislation to secure our borders through enforcing immigration laws, tightening border security, support the replacement and upgrades to current barriers and fencing and construction of barriers along the U.S. and Mexico international boundary as requested by those areas where it is needed, suspending and/or monitoring the issuance of visas to any place where adequate vetting cannot occur, end criminal cooperation and shelter in cities, counties, and states, and have zero tolerance and increased repercussions for criminal aliens.
Sadly, today some state and local officials have been enacting policies and giving lawbreakers shelter from being rightfully prosecuted and removed from our communities. In fact, these same laws forbid law enforcement agencies from cooperating with one another, and go as far as forcing the release of dangerous criminals into our communities exposing our citizens and legal residents to be victimized once again.
In response to our learning about Kent County’s contract with ICE, Movimiento Cosecha and GR Rapid Response to ICE began an End the Contract campaign, which was kicked off in June of 2018, where over 200 people showed up to a Kent County Commission meeting, which I wrote about.
Essentially, we shut down the meeting and most of the Commissioners left the meeting, thus allowing us to take it over and create a People’s Commission space, allowing those affect to tell their stories and talk about upcoming actions.
After the County Commission meeting was shut down the group went to the ICE office, which was locked. The group making the decisions about what action we could take next, was to have those of use who were willing to be arrested sit down in front of traffic at the corner of Michigan and Ottawa. The GRPD had their own narrative about what happened that day, which I deconstructed in an article here.
After the action in late June of 2018, we went back to every County Commission meeting for months, with a variety of tactics, which included testimonies from the immigrant community.
In September of 2018, the ACLU and the Michigan Immigrant Rights Center provided some added knowledge of the law and spoke during a Kent County Commission meeting. They provided testimony and a document about how the Kent County Commission was within their rights to not cooperate with ICE.
A former Kent County Commission, who presented himself as a “progressive” wrote a letter that explained why he had a problem with the End the Contract campaign, which you can read here.
Because there was so much going on and the County was not being very transparent, the End the Contract campaign decided to submit a Freedom of Information Act request to the County regarding ICE and our campaign. You can read the 138 pages here.
A great deal more could be said about the campaign to End the Contract. I did write a People’s History version of the End the Contract campaign, which you can read here, but let me include a list of things we did during the 14 months:
- We held dozens of strategy meetings, which always resulted in planning future actions.
- We attended every Kent County Commission Meeting to continue to make our demands, to offer testimony on family separation that was happening by ICE in Kent County and to monitor any comments made by commissioners about the contract.
- Some of the people involved in the campaign met with individual commissioners
- We ran a petition campaign to End the Contract, which we delivered at one of the Commission meetings.
- We held a protest outside of Chairman Saalfeld’s home the night before one of the commission meetings.
- We organized several protests at the Kent County Jail.
- We organized several protest outside of the various ICE offices in downtown Grand Rapids.
- We organized a disruption protest during ArtPrize, on their main stage, drawing attention to family separation in Kent County.
- We created educational materials, which we distributed.
- We created artwork and had sign making parties.
- We spoke to community-based groups about the campaign.
- We utilized social media to education and get the word out about the End the Contract Campaign.
- We held a People’s Commission action during one of the Kent County Commission meetings.
- We worked with the Western Michigan branch of the ACLU and MIRC, who not only obtained their own FOIA documents, but offered their legal expertise on why Kent County was not legally obligated to cooperate with ICE.
In the end, because of all the pressure that the End the Contract campaign was exerting on Kent County officials, along with the local and national press attention it was getting (brought about by the Jilmar Ramos Gomez case), ICE decided to not renew their contract with Kent County at the end of September of 2019. The Kent County Sheriff’s Department nor the Kent County Commission chose to do nothing throughout this process. It was the End of the Contract campaign, popular organizing and Direct Action that forced ICE to end their contract with Kent County. 
Lessons on the history of US Immigration Policy #3: How we talk about undocumented immigrants matters
With immigration being a major topic of conversation in the US, it is important think about how we talk about immigrants, legal status and borders, particularly the US/Mexican border.
Borders are the results of the creation of nation states, but they are always evolving, especially when imperial powers are always seeking to expand their territory. The US began 13 states in 1776, all of which were part of the eastern shoreline of the Atlantic.
As the US expanded west taking Indigenous land, they also looked south and more than doubled the total landmass of the US after the US/Mexican War. Most of the people who were living in the area of Mexico that became Texas, California and the other states that are now part of the US were never forced to move. Many Mexican nationals will often use the phrase, “We didn’t cross the border, the border crossed us.”
For a deeper understanding of how US borders evolved over time, see Greg Grandin’s excellent book, The End of the Myth: From the Frontier to the Border Wall in the Mind of America.
One interesting fact about how the US dealt with border crossings is the fact that they did not even create a formal border patrol until 1924, when congress passed the National Origins Act, thus establishing the Border Patrol as an agency of the U.S. Department of Labor.
The US/Mexican border evolved over time with the militarization of that border beginning with the Carter Administration and continuing to be more militarized throughout the past few decades. In 2024, the US provided $19.6 billion to Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and $9.6 billion on Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
Immigrants who cross into the US from Mexico at unauthorized points along the border do so because; 1) they can’t afford the cost of getting visas or other state sanctioned travel documents; and 2) most of them are fleeing military repression, poverty or because they have been displaced from their land because of climate change.
Most immigrants crossing into the US at unauthorized points are desperate and take great risks to come to the US. Every year the group No More Deaths documents the number of undocumented immigrants that die while attempting to enter the US. These immigrants risk their lives in order to find a better life.
Immigration status
Way before Donald Trump first ran for President in 2016, conservative and far right commentators would refer to undocumented immigrants as “illegal.” Designating immigrants as illegal is not only cruel, it dismisses the humanity of immigrants and it provides no context for why people have decided to enter into the US unauthorized. For a detailed exploration of why calling someone illegal is deeply problematic, see the book, No One is Illegal: Fighting Racism and State Violence on the U.S.-Mexico Border, by Justin Akers Chacon and Mike Davis.
Over the years we would hear politicians and those with an opinion about undocumented immigrants use the term “illegals” as if it was a fully accept and factual term. As more and more people pushed back on this demeaning label, the journalistic world began to notice.
Since 1953, the Associate Press has been publishing a Stylebook, which provides standards for journalist how how to report on issues and what kind of language reporters should be using.
Since 2012/2013, the Associated Press Style book has taken a position against referring to undocumented immigrants as “illegal,” stating:
- “We should not speak of people violating immigration laws without “reliable information about a person’s true status” — which most commonly means a legal charge against them or a court decision.
- Be especially careful about raids in which police seize large numbers of alleged illegal immigrants. Ask how many have actually been charged, and with what: entering the country illegally, overstaying visas or with non-immigration-related offenses? Were any people found to be legitimately in the country and released? If such details are not available, make that clear in the story.
- Don’t lump together in stories and scripts people who entered the country illegally as adults, and young people who were brought in as children and have spent most of their lives in the country. People have their own stories; respect that. Some people entered the country legally on a tourist or other visa but violated the law by overstaying it. When organizations and politicians talk about “illegal immigrants,” ask them specifically whom they mean.
- Be specific about nationalities. Don’t let terms like “illegal immigrants” be used synonymously with one nationality or ethnic group.
- Make sure you have a clear understanding of immigration-related legal issues in your area, including under what circumstances police have a right or obligation to inquire into a person’s immigration status.
- Our goal is to report fully and carefully on immigration matters without obscuring the fundamental facts of the situation.”
Partisan politics is often ugly and demeaning, especially when dealing with vulnerable and affected communities like immigrants. In recent weeks in the Grand Rapids news media, I have heard reporters use the term “illegal immigrants”, which does not reflect current journalistic standards, nor does it reflect the humanity of all people. We all need to do better when talking about the issue of immigration and make sure to always put a human face to the issue, since how we talk about immigration can often dictate what we do about it.
If your organization or community group would be interested in a presentation or class on the history of US Immigration Police, please contact Jeff at sjeff987@gmail.com.
Over the past several days, there has been a lots of local news coverage concerning an Anglican priest who used a Nazi salute at a recent National Pro-Life Summit.
The Anglican priest in question is Calvin Robinson, who has a long history of being part of the political and religious right, according to a recent MLive piece.
Now, to be clear, I find people like Calvin Robinson disgusting, not just because of what they say, but the political climate it helps to foster that results in violence against individuals – usually those who are most vulnerable in society, along with the systemic violence that institutions and public policy perpetrate, which is even more objectionable.
What Calvin Robinson stands for is nothing new. Robinson is part of a long legacy of people and organizations that have not been shy about their white supremacist views, their colonialist views, their perpetuation of misogyny, their anti-reproductive justice views, and their anti-trans and heterosexist beliefs.
In the US we are all too familiar with organizations like the KKK, the Proud Boys, the Oath Keepers, Right to Life, Voice for the Badge, the American Patriot Council, the Michigan Militia, the State Policy Network, Moral Majority, the Heritage Foundation, the Council for National Policy, Turning Point USA, etc. These groups have very clear ideologies and are often well funded to spew their hate and misinformation.
However, while we definitely should be paying attention to people like Calvin Robinson, we should also be thinking about and paying attention to the religious leaders that remain neutral. Ask yourself, with everything that is happening in this world and in the US, why are there so many religious leaders that are not speaking out? How is it that religious leaders can remain silent on the genocide in Gaza, the climate catastrophe, poverty, militarism, white supremacy, trans-phobia, xenophobia, and capitalism, to name just a few.
How is it that religious leaders can be so married to business as usual, to not rocking the boat, to maintaining order, or to not challenging systems of power and oppression. In some ways it is easy to stand back and condemn the likes of Calvin Robinson, but ignore all the clergy that don’t want to take a prophetic stand on the most pressing issues of the day.
Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. said, “There comes a time when silence is betrayal.” Indeed, being silent in the face of oppression is betrayal, but Dr. King had a much more poignant take on who he thought was more dangerous than the KKK.
While sitting in a jail cell in Birmingham, Alabama, Dr. King wrote a letter to local clergy, stating:
“First, I must confess that over the last few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in the stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Council-er or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate who is more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says “I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I can’t agree with your methods of direct action;” who paternalistically feels he can set the timetable for another man’s freedom; who lives by the myth of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait until a “more convenient season.
Shallow understanding from people of goodwill is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.”
It is time that we all begin to engage in some self-examination regarding Dr. King’s words. It’s time that we become more frustrated and angered by the clergy and other so-called leaders who too committed to maintaining order and business as usual politics. It is time we practice radical imagination and collective liberation.
Palestine Solidarity Information, Analysis, Local Actions and Events for the week of February 2nd
It has been almost 16 months since the Israeli government began their most recent assault on Gaza and the West Bank. The retaliation for the October 7, 2023 Hamas attack in Israel, has escalated to what the international community has called genocide, therefore, GRIID will be providing weekly links to information and analysis that we think can better inform us of what is happening, along with the role that the US government is playing. We will also provide information on local events and actions that people can get involved in. All of this information is to provide people with the capacity of what Noam Chomsky refers to as, intellectual self-defense.
Information
Israel Escalates West Bank Military Assault, Invading Areas Across the North
The Israeli Far Right Is Desperate to Resume the War
Gaza’s Unbreakable Resistance: A Historical Perspective on the War and Its Aftermath
Report: Israel Detaining Record Number of Palestinian Children Without Charges
Gaza Aid Survey Details Israel’s ‘Disregard of International Law’
‘CONSPIRACY THEORY’ IS NOW FACT: GREATER ISRAEL HAS ARRIVED
“A City of Ghosts” — Returning to Rafah to Find Death and Destruction
Analysis & History
New Realities of Israel/Palestine in the Trump Era: Settler Colonial Destinies in the 21st Century
Mustafa Barghouti on Israel’s “Defeat” in Gaza, Saudi Normalization, and the War on the West Bank
TRUMP’S NIGHTMARE PLAN FOR GAZA
Israel Is Still the Obstacle to a Permanent Gaza Cease-Fire
Events
Parallels in Power: Black Civil Rights and Power
Saturday, February 9 at 2pm, Fountain Street Church
Image used in this post is from the https://visualizingpalestine.org/visual/questions-children-gaza/.
Why Can’t the Michigan Catholic Church be courageous like the Confessing Church was in Nazi Germany?
No institution can e silent in the face of oppression. Well, unless the institution is designed to either benefit from or be a buffer against resistance to oppression.
The Michigan Catholic Conference recently came out with a statement, which was signed by the Bishops from the diocese across the state. Here is the body of the statement that was sent.
After reading this statement I can see the appeal, where they use a biblical quote, “you were a stranger and you welcomed me.” The Bishops also say they empathize with immigrant families over the fear of mass deportations and all the anti-immigrant rhetoric. The Catholic Bishops also say they pledge “unyielding support.”
The statement then calls on elected officials to support policies to keep immigrant families safe and together.
The statement ends by saying that immigrants should not give up faith they in the face of hardships and they ask for the intervention of Our Lady of Guadalupe.
As someone who was once studying to be a Catholic Priest, I understand the sentiment and the rhetoric. However, such sentiment and rhetoric is one of the reasons why I left the church around 1990.
No where in this statement from the Michigan Catholic Conference is there a sense of urgency or any concrete commitment to actively support immigrant families. More importantly, there is nothing in the state that would communicate to immigrant families that the Catholic Church would actively resist the threat of mass deportation by engaging in such practices as offering Sanctuary to those who are being terrorized with the threat of mass deportation.
This is not the time to be neutral or to offer nice words. Now is the time for action and resistance to the threat of mass deportation. My time in Latin America, from 1988 through 2006 certainly taught me that in communities of people and even faith leaders, took courageous action in the face of repression. When I say repression, I’m talking about brutal US financed counter-insurgency wars in Guatemala, El Salvador and Chiapas. The risks from people of faith there were greater than what the Michigan Catholic Conference is having to deal with.
What we need from so-called Christians is to adopt the same kind of commitment that the Confessing Church did in Nazi Germany, which wrote the Bareman Declaration. Why can’t the Michigan Catholic Bishop model the Liberation Theology practice in Latin America, like Archbishop Oscar Romero? Then there would be no polite dancing around the issue of mass deportation, just unequivocal resistance and courage.
Lessons on the history of US Immigration Policy #2: Anti-Immigrant Policies in the US are bi-partisan
I completely understand the sense of urgency around responding to the Trump Administration’s attempt to carry out mass deportations. This is why I do work with Movimiento Cosecha and GR Rapid Response to ICE.
However, millions of immigrants have been removed from the US over the past 25 years, by means of voluntary removal, enforced returns, Removals (deportation), Administrative Returns and Title 42. You can see in the graphic below what the numbers are like since the early 1990s.
In the 1990s, President Bill Clinton and congressional Republicans responded to fears over the free movement of capital—particularly as those fears related to the North America Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) implemented in 1994—by joining nativists in demonizing the free movement of people. The militarization of the US border began under Jimmy Carter and continues to this day.
After 9/11, 2001, all US administrations ramped up deportations and increased the budget for US Customs and Border Protection (CBP), along with creating Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). You can see in the graph above (in red) how removals/deportations increased after 9/11.
The Trump Administration has essentially made anti-immigrant xenophobia a main talking point, a talking point that has resonated with his followers. This anti-immigrant rhetoric has been effective, but it is not new. Here is President Clinton’s State of the Union speech from 1996:
“All Americans, not only in the states most heavily affected but in every place in this country, are rightly disturbed by the large numbers of illegal aliens entering our country. The jobs they hold might otherwise be held by citizens or legal immigrants. The public service they use impose burdens on our taxpayers. That’s why our administration has moved aggressively to secure borders more by hiring a record number of new border guards, by deporting twice as many criminal aliens as ever before, by cracking down on illegal hiring, by barring welfare benefits to illegal aliens. In the budget I will present to you, we will try to do more to speed the deportation of illegal aliens who are arrested for crimes, to better identify illegal aliens in the workplace. We are a nation of immigrants. But we are also a nation of laws. It is wrong and ultimately self-defeating for a nation of immigrants to permit the kind of abuse of our immigration laws we have seen in recent years, and we must do more to stop it.”
Daniel Denvir, who wrote the book, All-American Nativism: How the Bipartisan War on Immigrants Explains Politics as We Know It, makes the following point:
“Anti-immigrant politics became defined by attacks from both right-wing nativists and the bipartisan establishment on “illegal immigration.” It was a form of security theater that functioned to safeguard not only neoliberalism but also (to nativist consternation) legal immigration. Legal immigration enabled by the 1965 reform is the largest driver of the demographic change that nativists oppose: more than three-quarters of foreign-born people in the United States are here with authorization.6 But the larger and newly diverse large-scale legal immigration since the passing of the Hart-Celler Act has always been protected by ethnic advocacy organizations, labor unions, religious groups, business interests, and powerful figures within both major parties. Anti-“illegal” politics, then, have been at the center of a public immigration debate that has blamed undocumented people for most everything.”
This is why Movimiento Cosecha was not celebrating after the Biden Electoral victory in 2020, since the affected community, the undocumented immigrant community, has first hand knowledge that both parties will deport them in larger numbers. They did banner drops that said, Democrats Deport us too!
It is incumbent that just because the Democrats do not engage in the more overtly anti-immigrant rhetoric that they aren’t carrying out the same repressive anti-immigrant policies. In 2023, I wrote an article headlined, Where is the outrage from white liberals? After 2 years, the Biden Administration’s immigration policy is very similar to the Trump Administration. In that article, I document that the Biden Administration was continuing many of the same policies that the Trump had put in place from 2017 through the end of 2020.
So, let’s fight against mass deportation now, but allies cannot abandon this movement once the Trump Administration is gone, because anti-immigrant policies in the US are fundamentally bi-partisan.
State of Michigan is giving away $2.8 million of public money to build a road for a private weapons company
On Wednesday, MLive reported that, “the Michigan Strategic Fund has allocated $2.8 million to build a road from the city of Grayling to a planned Saab Inc. munitions plant in nearby Grayling Township.”
The Michigan Strategic Fund had approved an additional $3.5 million to the Swedish weapons company Saab Inc., public that money that was provided for the construction of a munitions factory to the global corporation.
According to the MLive article, Saab Inc. will assemble ground-launched bomb systems and shoulder-launched munitions for the U.S. Department of Defense. The rest of the article talked mostly about land use and land sales to Saab Inc., but didn’t explore any other angles related to the use of public money for a privately owned weapons corporation.
One omission in the MLive article was any information about the Michigan Strategic Fund, which was created by former Michigan Governor Rick Snyder in 2012. The Michigan Strategic Fund Board is also made up of people from the corporate world, along with a few government staffers. Included among the MSF Board is Randy Thelen, the President and CEO of the Right Place Inc.
Another omission centers around the kinds of weapons that will be manufactured by Saab Inc. at the northern Michigan facility. The MLive article states they will make “ground-launched bomb systems and shoulder-launched munitions for the U.S. Department of Defense.” If you look on the Saab Inc. site you can get a more detailed description of the weapons, such as the Ground-Launched Small Diameter Bomb (GLSDB) and the AT4, which is a shoulder launching system, that has its own promotional video.
Saab Inc. also operates in 30 different countries from around the world and sells weapons to to over 100 countries. Therefore, Saab Inc. is not only a weapons manufacturer, they are a weapons trafficker.
Lastly, it is worth noting that Saab Inc. is worth $11.27 Billion, which begs the question why the State of Michigan is providing $2.8 million to build a road for the global weapons trafficker?
In conclusion, I leave you with the words of President Eisenhower from his farewell speech on the dangers of the military industrial complex:
Now this conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence—economic, political, even spiritual—is felt in every city, every Statehouse, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet, we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources, and livelihood are all involved. So is the very structure of our society.
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.
Lessons on the history of US Immigration Policy #1: Is the US a nation of immigrants?
It is quite common to hear from politicians, the news media and other centers of social and cultural influence this idea that the United States of America is a nation of immigrants. This sentiment was used by Grand Rapids City officials during last night’s City Commission meeting.
Not only is this belief that the US is a nation of immigrants historically inaccurate, it is a form of erasure and exclusion.
Indigenous historian and author Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz, in her book, Not “A Nation of Immigrants”: Settler Colonialism, White Supremacy, and a History of Erasure and Exclusion, provides us with 4 overarching reasons why the idea that the US is a nation of immigrants is not only wrong, but it is harmful.
- Settler Colonialism is not immigration, it is a violent invasion that functions on Indigenous elimination. America was founded by Settler Colonialism, which is a type pf colonialism that functions as an invasive structure dependent on the ongoing elimination of Indigenous populations in order to assert settler sovereignty. This elimination is seen through the genocide of 80+ million Indigenous peoples, forced assimilation (through Native boarding schools), continued disappearances of Indigenous women and Two Spirit peoples, resource extraction/violation of treaties, and much more.
- Kidnapped Africans who were forcibly brought to Turtle Island as slaves, were not immigrants. African slaves were considered “property” by colonizing forces and were violently transported by slaves ships to build the Settler Colonies on stolen Indigenous lands.
- Racist laws opposing immigration have been the norm. American state propaganda says, “Give me your tired, your poor….” But in reality they meant “Give me your white people.” In 1882, the Chinese Exclusion Act was passed, prohibiting all immigration of Chinese laborers and the US Border Patrol originated as the “Mounted Guards” in El Paso, Texas, whose primary purpose was to restrict the illegal immigration of Chinese people.
- Saying “American is a nation of Immigrants” is a violent form of erasure, white-washing, and state propaganda.
If your organization or community group would be interested in a presentation or class on the history of US Immigration Police, please contact Jeff at sjeff987@gmail.com.
There was a tremendous outpouring of public support for Grand Rapids to declare itself a Sanctuary City
Over the past two months, GR Rapid Response to ICE and Movimiento Cosecha GR had been meeting to discuss and plan to pressure the City of Grand Rapids to declare itself a Sanctuary City.
While engaged in a hunger strike in Lansing to win Driver’s Licenses for undocumented immigrants in early December, Movimiento Cosecha organizer Gema Lowe had struck up a conversation with newly elected Mayor David LaGrand. She asked him if he would support Grand Rapids becoming a Sanctuary City. LaGrand responded by saying that “we have to do a whole lot more than that.” The immigrant justice organizer said, “But we are asking you as the new Mayor of Grand Rapids to get behind GR being a Sanctuary City.” Mayor LaGrand would not make a commitment that day nearly two months ago.
Last night there were easily over 100 people who had come to the Grand Rapids City Commission meeting to demand that they declare Grand Rapids a Sanctuary City and commits to preventing the Grand Rapids Police Department from cooperating with Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials and any law enforcement agency that seek to arrest, detain and deport undocumented immigrants. These two demands were part of an online Action Alert that was sent to the Mayor, the 6 Commissioners, the City Manager, the City Attorney and the City Clerk. These 10 Grand Rapids City officials have each received over 2,000 electronic messages to meet these two demands.
There were so many people who came to speak about GR becoming a Sanctuary City that the meeting didn’t end until 11:30pm. Besides the City Chambers being packed, there were more than 50 people people who had to wait in the lobby to watch the commission meeting before being able to come up to the 9th floor to give public comment, and that doesn’t include the countless people who didn’t stay the entire time because people have lots of other responsibilities to attend to.
There were members of the affected community who spoke about what it is like to live in constant fear of “La Migra”, often fighting back tears as the recounted witnessing their parents or other family members being deported. One immigrant told the Commissioners that he learned how to respond be prepared if ICE came to his home even before he learned how to do simple math.Many immigrants talked about how hard they have worked to support their families, often on minimum wage jobs, while other immigrants have created their own businesses, pay taxes and do the work that no one else wants to do in West Michigan.
There were countless allies who got up to speak, with many of them talking about their own heritage and which generation they were, since most of us a from immigrant families. Rev. Doug Van Doren stated that Grand Rapids is already a Sanctuary City for him, since he doesn’t have to worry about ICE coming to take him or his family away. Many of the allies spoke about their work as teacher, counselors, social workers, and pastors, where they are confronted with the daily realities and daily reminders of the simple fact that undocumented immigrants never know when ICE will come for them and their families because they don’t have documentation.
You can watch and listen to the testimony from over 100 people who were calling for the City of Grand Rapids to declare itself a Sanctuary city at this link.
There were two people who not only spoke against the demand to make GR a Sanctuary city and both of these white men used racist, xenophobia rhetoric that was filled with the ideological talking points that have been coming out of the mouth of Donald Trump since he first began campaigning for the presidency in 2016.
City Officials respond
Before I get to how city officials responded the 3 hour long public comments, it is important to note that the City Manager spoke before public comment. Mark Washington wanted to try to convince those who sent letters and those who spoke last night that the city already had robust immigration policies in place, such as their equity policies and the fact that the Chief of Police has already come out and said that the GRPD will not enforce federal immigration policy.
As someone who has followed these matters closely for years, the policy that the City Manager was referring to, is known as the Foreign National’s Policy.
This policy clear states:
The policy allows officers to provide assistance to federal immigration authorities when there is an emergency that poses an immediate danger to public safety or federal agents.
Many of us from GR Rapid Response to ICE and Movimiento Cosecha are all too familiar that the rhetoric of the City and the GRPD is in dark contrast to what they practice. See my article entitled, the criminalization of dissent in Grand Rapids.
What follows are some of the responses by Grand Rapids City officials to the overwhelming demand for GR to declare itself a sanctuary.
Commissioner Belchak stated that there are no easy answers and there were probably as many people who would oppose GR being a Sanctuary City, they just didn’t show up. Now, there is no way she could know this, but the fundamental difference is that what was on display last night was a demonstration of organized people getting behind a specific cause.
Commissioner Perdue stated that decisions like this are not hard, but dangerous. She thinks that being a Sanctuary could do more harm than good.
Commissioner Ysasi acknowledges all the effort that has gone into this campaign. She stated it was an emotional evening, with lots of stories and fears. She brought up the fact that we have also been pressing the GRPS to declare themselves a Sanctuary School District. Commissioner Ysasi then speaks to the CDBG grants they receive from the federal government, which could be put at risk if GR becomes a Sanctuary City.
Commissioner Kilgore said it is scary, since he is the first queer person to be a City Commissioner. “We have good policies, but we have to make them more embodied,” he said.
Commissioner Knight talks about Trump and previous administrations, then asks us to use this energy everyday to deal with the homeless, etc. She has heard from non-profits who don’t have funding and can’t give out gas card. It felt like she was talking down to us about the political reality, like we are aware of what is coming and what has been happening for decades. She kept says, “8 days,” referring to the brief time since Trump became President again. We all know that these issues are inter-related and we know how to have an intersectional lens when thinking about systems of oppression work.
Mayor LaGrand said he was glad to know people are willing to act, but he didn’t seem to acknowledge or understand that Movimiento Cosecha and GR Rapid Response to ICE have been acting since 2017 around immigration justice matters. LaGrand says the overarching concern is for care and compassion. While I don’t disagree with this sentiment, people were demanding action from the city.. LaGrand then said something that shocked people, He said that they were not really hearing from the affected community. I counted at least several dozen from the affected community. Then there is the issue that many people from the affected community don’t feel safe at City hall during these meetings because there are always cops there.
Now, I definitely felt frustrated with the responses, but after reflecting on it on the way home last night I reminded myself that we already had a victory last night. Sure, Grand Rapids City officials did not meet our demands, but they have heard from several thousand people, plus the local news media has been reporting on these issues for more than a week. Our collective efforts have forced elected officials and the public at large to think about immigration policy and the realities that undocumented immigrants face every day. This is what we call polarization, where people can’t be neutral and need to pick a side. Which side are you on?
Grand Rapids Institute for Information Democracy 