Americans are largely unaware that Mexicans were frequently the targets of lynch mobs, from the mid-19th century until well into the 20th century, second only to African-Americans in the scale and scope of the crimes. One case, largely overlooked or ignored by American journalists but not by the Mexican government, was that of seven Mexican shepherds hanged by white vigilantes near Corpus Christi, Tex., in late November 1873. The mob was probably trying to intimidate the shepherds’ employer into selling his land. None of the killers were arrested.
From 1848 to 1928, mobs murdered thousands of Mexicans, though surviving records allowed us to clearly document only about 547 cases. These lynchings occurred not only in the southwestern states of Arizona, California, New Mexico and Texas, but also in states far from the border, like Nebraska and Wyoming.
(AP) – The Trump administration is considering a proposal to mobilize as many as 100,000 National Guard troops to round up unauthorized immigrants, including millions living nowhere near the Mexico border, according to a draft memo obtained by The Associated Press.
The 11-page document calls for the unprecedented militarization of immigration enforcement as far north as Portland, Oregon, and as far east as New Orleans, Louisiana.
Four states that border on Mexico are included in the proposal — California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas — but it also encompasses seven states contiguous to those four — Oregon, Nevada, Utah, Colorado, Oklahoma, Arkansas and Louisiana.
Governors in the 11 states would have a choice whether to have their guard troops participate, according to the memo, written by U.S. Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly, a retired four-star Marine general.
While National Guard personnel have been used to assist with immigration-related missions on the U.S.-Mexico border before, they have never been used as broadly or as far north.
The memo is addressed to the then-acting heads of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and U.S. Customs and Border Protection. It would serve as guidance to implement the wide-ranging executive order on immigration and border security that President Donald Trump signed Jan. 25. Such memos are routinely issued to supplement executive orders.
Also dated Jan. 25, the draft memo says participating troops would be authorized “to perform the functions of an immigration officer in relation to the investigation, apprehension and detention of aliens in the United States.” It describes how the troops would be activated under a revived state-federal partnership program, and states that personnel would be authorized to conduct searches and identify and arrest any unauthorized immigrants.
Requests to the White House and the Department of Homeland Security for comment and a status report on the proposal were not answered.
The draft document has circulated among DHS staff over the last two weeks. As recently as Friday, staffers in several different offices reported discussions were underway.
If implemented, the impact could be significant. Nearly one-half of the 11.1 million people residing in the U.S. without authorization live in the 11 states, according to Pew Research Center estimates based on 2014 Census data.
Use of National Guard troops would greatly increase the number of immigrants targeted in one of Trump’s executive orders last month, which expanded the definition of who could be considered a criminal and therefore a potential target for deportation. That order also allows immigration agents to prioritize removing anyone who has “committed acts that constitute a chargeable criminal offense.”
Under current rules, even if the proposal is implemented, there would not be immediate mass deportations. Those with existing deportation orders could be sent back to their countries of origin without additional court proceedings. But deportation orders generally would be needed for most other unauthorized immigrants.
The troops would not be nationalized, remaining under state control.
Spokespeople for the governors of Arizona, Utah, Nevada, California, Colorado, Oklahoma, Oregon and New Mexico said they were unaware of the proposal, and either declined to comment or said it was premature to discuss whether they would participate. The other three states did not immediately respond to the AP.
The proposal would extend the federal-local partnership program that President Barack Obama’s administration began scaling back in 2012 to address complaints that it promoted racial profiling.
The 287(g) program, which Trump included in his immigration executive order, gives local police, sheriff’s deputies and state troopers the authority to assist in the detection of immigrants who are in the U.S. illegally as a regular part of their law enforcement duties on the streets and in jails.
The draft memo also mentions other items included in Trump’s executive order, including the hiring of an additional 5,000 border agents, which needs financing from Congress, and his campaign promise to build a wall between the U.S. and Mexico.
The signed order contained no mention of the possible use of state National Guard troops.
According to the draft memo, the militarization effort would be proactive, specifically empowering Guard troops to solely carry out immigration enforcement, not as an add-on the way local law enforcement is used in the program.
Allowing Guard troops to operate inside non-border states also would go far beyond past deployments.
In addition to responding to natural or man-made disasters or for military protection of the population or critical infrastructure, state Guard forces have been used to assist with immigration-related tasks on the U.S.-Mexico border, including the construction of fences.
In the mid-2000s, President George W. Bush twice deployed Guard troops on the border to focus on non-law enforcement duties to help augment the Border Patrol as it bolstered its ranks. And in 2010, then-Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer announced a border security plan that included Guard reconnaissance, aerial patrolling and military exercises.
In July 2014, then-Texas Gov. Rick Perry ordered 1,000 National Guard troops to the border when the surge of migrant children fleeing violence in Central America overwhelmed U.S. officials responsible for their care. The Guard troops’ stated role on the border at the time was to provide extra sets of eyes but not make arrests.
Bush initiated the federal 287(g) program — named for a section of a 1996 immigration law — to allow specially trained local law enforcement officials to participate in immigration enforcement on the streets and check whether people held in local jails were in the country illegally. ICE trained and certified roughly 1,600 officers to carry out those checks from 2006 to 2015.
The memo describes the program as a “highly successful force multiplier” that identified more than 402,000 “removable aliens.”
But federal watchdogs were critical of how DHS ran the program, saying it was poorly supervised and provided insufficient training to officers, including on civil rights law. Obama phased out all the arrest power agreements in 2013 to instead focus on deporting recent border crossers and immigrants in the country illegally who posed a safety or national security threat.
Trump’s immigration strategy emerges as detentions at the nation’s southern border are down significantly from levels seen in the late 1990s and early 2000s. Last year, the arrest tally was the fifth-lowest since 1972. Deportations of people living in the U.S. illegally also increased under the Obama administration, though Republicans criticized Obama for setting prosecution guidelines that spared some groups from the threat of deportation, including those brought to the U.S. illegally as children.
Last week, ICE officers arrested more than 680 people around the country in what Kelly said were routine, targeted operations; advocates called the actions stepped-up enforcement under Trump.
The varied bunting (Passerina versicolor) is a species of songbird in the cardinal family, Cardinalidae.The range of the varied bunting stretches from the southern parts of Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas in the United States south throughout Mexico as far as Oaxaca.
WASHINGTON—Not a single member of Congress who represents the territory on the southwest border said they support President Donald Trump’s request for $1.4 billion to begin construction of his promised wall, according to a Wall Street Journal survey, testing the administration’s ability to reach a deal on government funding next week.
Most lawmakers representing the region—both Democrats and Republicans—said they are opposed and many said they have unanswered questions. A few were noncommittal, but not a single member of the House or Senate representing the region expressed support for the funding request. That includes nine members of the House and eight senators across four states: Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California.
The question is increasingly urgent as Congress and the White House scramble to agree on a spending bill needed to keep the government open. Existing funding for the government expires April 28, and the White House says it wants funding for the border wall as part of the package. Senior congressional Republicans have long indicated that they prefer to leave it out. That is partly because Senate Democrats are opposed, and their votes will be needed because most legislation requires 60 votes to clear the chamber, where Republicans hold 52 seats. Congressional Republicans have said they don’t want to risk the partial government shutdown that such a showdown could trigger.
Still, the White House is holding firm on its position.
“You’re always going to have constituencies within both parties that have local issues—we get that,” Mick Mulvaney, the head of the Office of Management and Budget, said in an interview. He added that the GOP leadership is on board to fight for the funding because “they know it’s a priority for the president.”
A spokesman for House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi replied by noting that Mr. Trump had promised Mexico would pay for the wall: “The White House’s demands that American taxpayers now foot the bill for a multi-billion dollar boondoggle are intensely opposed by Democrats and many Republicans.”
Enthusiasm for the project has been tepid, at best, from many lawmakers since Mr. Trump submitted his request. In March, he asked Congress for $1.4 billion in spending for the current fiscal year for the project, with an additional $2.6 billion for next year. Many Republicans responded that the Trump approach is overly focused on a physical barrier rather than other approaches to border security, such as technology, that experts say can be more effective and less expensive.
Administration officials said the 2017 money would pay for 48 miles of new border and levee wall systems, and 14 miles of replacement fencing, as well as some technology improvements and road construction.
“As representatives of the communities that make up our southern border, we recognize the need for robust border security and infrastructure to ensure public safety and increase cross border commerce,” Reps. Will Hurd (R., Texas) and Martha McSally (R., Ariz.) wrote in a letter last month to senior administration officials. “However, we also have an obligation to be good stewards of taxpayer dollars and as such have a number of questions.”
Some who back immigration restrictions dismiss these lawmakers’ concerns as parochial and irrelevant to the national imperative to secure the border. But opposition from border-state members is significant in that many know the issue best. Ms. McSally, for example, chairs the Homeland Security border security subcommittee, and in an interview, she said walls do little to stop criminal organizations from getting across the border. “They will go over, through or under physical barriers, sometimes pretty quickly,” she said.
Mr. Hurd, whose district includes 800 miles along the border, describes a wall as “the most expensive and least effective way to secure the border.”
A third House Republican whose district touches the border, Rep. Steve Pearce of New Mexico, also opposes funding if it is focused on a wall, as opposed to a more comprehensive approach. “The solution must be a dynamic, multifaceted one,” he said.
In the Senate, none of the four Republicans representing border states have expressed support for the project as conceived by Mr. Trump.
Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, the No. 2 Republican in the Senate, has repeatedly voiced concerns about the Trump spending request, including the impact of adding to the debt as well as the wisdom of the project. Mr. Cornyn has long said the Trump wall proposal is too narrowly focused, and he says he is working on legislation that would take a more comprehensive approach to border security.
Sen. Jeff Flake (R., Ariz.) has said he also thinks border security should be focused elsewhere. “I will continue to review options as the current appropriations process moves forward,” he said in a statement Friday.
Sens. Ted Cruz (R., Texas) and John McCain (R., Ariz.) have both voiced skepticism about the Trump plan as well. A Cruz spokesman didn’t reply when asked directly whether he backs the supplemental spending request, and a McCain spokeswoman declined to comment.
Meanwhile, House and Senate Democrats are universally opposed—some forcefully so.
“There is no way in hell I support the request for $1.4 billion in border wall spending. My view on the wall is that we should bulldoze the existing structures,” said Rep. Filemon Vela (D., Texas).
Rep. Raúl Grijalva (D., Ariz.) joined a lawsuit seeking to block the project based on environmental factors. The other House Democrats opposing the project include Reps. Juan Vargas, who represents the entire California section of the border; and Texas Reps. Beto O’Rourke, Henry Cuellar and Vicente Gonzalez.
“The idea of a wall sounds good as campaign rhetoric, but the campaign is over and we need to offer the American people real solutions, not a false sense of security,” Mr. Gonzalez said.
In the Senate, Democrats Dianne Feinstein and Kamala Harris of California and Tom Udall and Martin Heinrich of New Mexico are all strongly opposed, according to statements and interviews.
One activist who backs tighter immigration laws, Mark Krikorian, argued that border lawmakers’ views fail to take into account the national interest.
“It doesn’t surprise me that congressmen near the border are going to be either opposed or ambivalent but that’s neither here nor there in deciding whether it’s a good idea,” he said.
DNA INDICATES LONG-AGO SOUTHLAND WOLF WAS ACTUALLY A MEXICAN GRAY
The only wolf ever documented in Southern California may
have been a victim of mistaken identity nearly a century ago.
The 100-pound male wolf was pursuing a bighorn sheep in the
Mojave Desert’s rugged Providence Mountains in 1922 when a steel-jaw trap
clamped onto one of its legs.
Based on measurements of its skull, biologists at the time
determined that it was a lone Southern Rocky Mountain gray wolf that had
wandered out of a population in southern Nevada.
But a different story is emerging from a study of that skull
at UCLA, where researchers have identified DNA markers indicating it was
actually a Mexican gray wolf, the “lobo” of Southwestern lore.
Bob Wayne, an evolutionary biologist at the university, said
the finding could help extend the historic range of the federally endangered
Mexican gray wolf, which the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service contends ranged
over parts of central and northern Mexico, western Texas, southern New Mexico
and southeastern and central Arizona.
”Broadening the species’ historical range to include
Southern California would allow for an assessment of additional habitats for
Mexican wolf reintroduction programs,” Wayne said. That, in turn, could
enhance its chances of survival.»
Urbanus procne, the brown longtail, is a butterfly of the Hesperiidae family. It is found from Argentina, north through Central America and Mexico to southern Texas. Rare strays can be found up to southern New Mexico, southern Arizona and southern California. Photo credits: Charlesjsharp/ from Sharp Photography and Anne Toal from US
Mexico and the southern American states are now a human family.
Mexico (Raquel) is their older sister, and they have lost their parents during a terrible gang shooting fight. Now Raquel has to become a young mother and take care of all her siblings while she tries to have a normal teenager life. Sometimes, her friend Alfred helps her being their babysitter.
January 12, 1917 - Germany Transmits the Zimmerman Telegram, Proposing German-Mexican Alliance against the United States
Pictured - Transmitted in code on Swedish and American cables, the Zimmerman note was immediately intercepted and deciphered by British Intelligence. They could not have fabricated a more damning document.
Arthur Zimmerman was a minor German functionary, until his dogged loyalty for the Paul von Hindenburg and Erich Ludendorff, Germany’s military duumvirate, won him promotion to a top spot in November 1916 as Foreign Minister. Now in charge of German diplomacy, Zimmerman’s masters charged him with resolving a problem that plagued their strategic plans. After the battlefield failures of 1916 to knock France out of the war, the duo wanted to resume unrestricted submarine warfare to try and starve Britain into submission instead. However, everyone knew that to do so would almost certainly mean American entry into the war against Germany. Was there a solution that would allow the U-boats to strike without risking bringing thousands of American reinforcements across the Atlantic?
Zimmerman had one idea. Since the 19th century, imperial powers had seen Mexico as a way to extend their influence into the New World. In the early 20th century it also acted as an arena for foreign powers. Both Japan and Germany had influential delegation in Mexico City designed to extend power into the nation. In 1910, revolution and civil war erupted in Mexico, and raids by Mexican warlords across the border spurred the American army to cross into Mexico, trying to find one culprit named Pancho Villa. The current Mexican imbroglio offered tempting diplomatic prospects, at least to Zimmerman.
In January, Zimmerman cabled a coded transmission to the German ambassador in Mexico. It read as follows:
We intend to begin on the first of February unrestricted submarine
warfare. We shall endeavor in spite of this to keep the United States of
America neutral. In the event of this not succeeding, we make Mexico a
proposal of alliance on the following basis: make war together, make
peace together, generous financial support and an understanding on our
part that Mexico is to reconquer the lost territory in Texas, New
Mexico, and Arizona. The settlement in detail is left to you. You will
inform the President of the above most secretly as soon as the outbreak
of war with the United States of America is certain and add the
suggestion that he should, on his own initiative, invite Japan to
immediate adherence and at the same time mediate between Japan and
ourselves. Please call the President’s attention to the fact that the
ruthless employment of our submarines now offers the prospect of
compelling England in a few months to make peace.
Zimmerman proposed a German-Mexican alliance should America enter the way, promising recovery of the American southwest, lost 70 years earlier. Later, Zimmeman also suggested wooing the Japanese into an anti-American alliance as well.
But Zimmeman’s little idea was also a massive strategic blunder. The message was dispatched from the US embassy in Berlin to Copenhagan, where it was sent further, again by diplomatic cable, to London, using Swedish and American cables. From London the message went to the German embassy in Washington D.C., and then on to Mexico City. Because of delays and waits needed for diplomatic permissioned, the message arrived finally on January 1919.
Amazingly, Zimmerman did not seem to consider that diplomatic cables across the Atlantic were operated by the British, nor that British Intelligence routinely tapped into American messages. The British picked up and decoded the telegram almost immediately. They could not have fabricated a more damning document, and in fact some seriously could not believe it. Here was a German message invited Mexico to invade the United States. If the Americans got hold of it, they certainly must join the war. The most delicate matter was how to give the message to the Americans without admitting that Britain spied on American messages constantly.
Gible is a pokemon that lives in the dryest of habitats, making it a dweller of the deserts in Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas. It is still semi-rare, as it is a dragon type Pokemon, but through searching sand dunes, sand pits, or by luck, you could come across one in these areas.
In late 1983, looking for the subjects and locations that would bring the desolate landscape of the American West to life for his iconic film Paris, Texas, German filmmaker Wim Wenders took his Makina Plaubel 6 x 7 camera on the road. Driving through Texas, Arizona, New Mexico and California, Wenders was captivated by the unique, saturated, colorful light of the vast, wild landscape of the American West–even in the 20th century, a land associated with cowboys and outlaws, and suffused with the mythology of the frontier.
Okay I'm sorry but I lurk on your blog cause awesome tags and awesome stuff and I saw that with a Night Vale thing you put 'Southwestern Gothic' and recently I wondered if that was a legit thing and I'd like to talk about it with someone to figure out what southwestern gothic would be in comparison to southern gothic? B/c I only know a little bit of southern gothic and I'm trying to figure out what southwestern gothic would be and it's hard.
anon this is such a good question and i’m gonna preface answering it with two things:
firstly, i am not familiar with southern gothic except generally (i’ve read truman capote, tennessee williams, harper lee, etc; southern gothic interests me but it’s not my #1 priority) and i probably shouldn’t use the term “southwestern gothic” because i’m really not capable of talking about it “in comparison”
secondly, like. i don’t live in the southwest. i grew up in the bay area and moved to new york city. i’m p dang familiar with the southwest– or at least the californian bits of it– but i don’t live there.
that said, here is a thing that i want: an entire genre of people writing surreal and freakyodd and fantastical and strange stories set in california and nevada and arizona and new mexico and texas, because, like, dude
and here are some things i would want out of that aesthetic:
first, because of a really really really facepalm-filled experience with an author from brooklyn trying to write a mexican kid in a manuscript yesterday: get your mexican culture right. you can’t write the southwest without writing about the influence of mexico (and, to a lesser extent, the rest of central and south america). 75% of place names are in spanish and most people speak at least a little conversational spanish. the hispanic population is high. there is a shitton of mexican food (and that doesn’t mean hard-shelled tacos, dude, it means soft corn tortillas and green salsa and horchata and jarritos and fuckin’ lengua and a shitton of really good rice.) old missions built by the spanish, houses with red roofs in the spanish/mexican style, catholic churches. this was mexican territory for a long time and it oughta look that way.
on that note: huge native american influence, huge native american presence. go and look at a map of reservations in the u.s., take a good look at arizona. there should be native american names for things, there should be native americans. (there should be petroglyphs! petroglyphs are cool.)
to a lesser extent: ghost towns, there should be hella ghost towns, there should be the imprints of spanish cowboys and outlaws and tall tales (think more pecos bill than paul bunyan obviously)
everything should be too big; everything should take a little too long to get to. everyone should drive absolutely everywhere. the sky should be too blue and go on forever, in a way that’s half liberating and half terrifying, and there should be too many stars.
la la la, empty and forbidding desert, spectacularly beautiful sunsets, mesas, long empty roads, la la la, you know this shit
(purple and orange and gold, please, with lots of neon)
nighttime is warm and dry and there’s a hot wind blowing and it's great; sometimes there are rainstorms and then there are flash floods and it’s terrifying and still great
there are roughly 30000 local attractions called “devil’s x” (devil’s marsh, devil’s kitchen, devil’s gate, devil’s windpipe, devil’s golf course) so like c'mon people who write religious shit get your asses over here, the devil lives in the southwest and he is having fun
nothing is tired, nothing is sick. everything is speed. the past doesn’t weigh on you; the past might not even be real. there’s a lot of dust, but none of it’s settled. the desert is full of ghosts but there isn’t any haunting.
okay like for the record i love saguaros too but they only grow in arizona and some parts of california, friend, please consider prickly pears and joshua trees and cholla cactus, i believe in you
i am no longer interested in chupacabras. please stop talking about chupacabras. talk about coyote. coyote is cool. jackalopes: also nice.