As renowned Native American artist Mateo Romero drove along Old Santa Fe Trail on a hot July day, he couldn’t have imagined that he’d soon be lying  face down on the ground with a rifle pointed at his head. 

He was on his way to pick up his son from school when his dog became ill in the backseat of the car. The road lacked a shoulder wide enough to park safely, so he pulled over into the nearest driveway to clean up the mess and tend to his dog. But when the homeowner arrived in her driveway shortly after, she took one look at Mateo and assumed the worst.

Mateo tried to tell her about his dog and the mess in the backseat of his car, but she wouldn’t listen. He told her he was eager to get on his way, but she refused to move her SUV, strategically parked in front of the driveway exit. She rolled up her window and dialed 911, telling the dispatcher  she was worried because two “Hispanics” recently tried to burglarize her home. 

Mateo was trapped.

“At first I didn’t really understand what was happening,” said Mateo  “Then I realized, ‘Oh she must be calling the police.’” 

Afraid of what the police might do to a brown man in a white woman’s driveway, Mateo tried once more to talk to her, but she wouldn’t roll down her window. 

“I’m thinking, ‘I’m at risk. I’m going to get shot, I’m going to get shot by the cops. This is dangerous.’”

An officer arrived three minutes later and immediately pointed an AR 15-rifle at Mateo’s head and ordered him to the ground. The officer then cuffed Mateo and threw him in the backseat of a police car, never even asking him why he was in the driveway. 

Mateo’s fears were not unfounded. An officer arrived three minutes later and immediately pointed an AR 15-rifle at Mateo’s head and ordered him to the ground. The officer then cuffed Mateo and threw him in the backseat of a police car, never even asking him why he was in the driveway. Even after the officer, and a supervising officer who arrived later, discerned that Mateo had not burglarized the house, they kept Mateo handcuffed and in the back of the police car. With no sense of urgency, and only when it was convenient for them, did they finally ask Mateo for his version of events before uncuffing and releasing him. 

The incident happened four years ago, but it’s still fresh in Mateo’s mind.  It’s the reason his heart races every time he passes by the Santa Fe Police.  It’s the reason he now tells all five of his children never to chase after their football if they accidentally throw it over a fence onto someone else’s property. And it’s the reason he no longer has a studio in the area. 

“If you survive this kind of encounter, the real price you pay afterwards is you don’t feel like an American citizen anymore,” says Mateo.  “I thought that people had kind of figured out that racism — that judging someone by the color of their skin — was a bad thing and now I’m finding out that I was wrong.”
 
Tragically, these kinds of confrontations are all too common for people of color in the United States. 
 
Over the last three months, there has been a spate of high profile incidents similar to Mateo’s, in which white people called the cops on people of color after viewing them with suspicion. 
 
A black student fell asleep in a Yale dormitory common area and a suspicious white student called the cops because she didn’t think her peer belonged.  Two Native American brothers from New Mexico took part in a tour of Colorado State University and a concerned white mother called the cops because she thought they seemed “odd” and “creepy.” Three professional black artists exited an Airbnb and a neighbor called the cops because the women failed to “wave back.” Two black men awaited their white colleague in a Starbucks and a white employee called the cops after only three minutes because they hadn’t made a purchase. 
 
In none of these instances did callers have legitimate grounds for calling the police. But racial bias and discrimination are so deep-seated in this country that they masquerade as credible fear. 
 
People of color can’t simply exist in this country  without the risk that someone will assume they pose a threat. A white teenager of little words is likely to be perceived as quiet or shy. A Native American teen is perceived as “creepy” and threatening. A white woman who falls asleep in the library is likely to be seen as hardworking and studious.  A black woman is questioned if she “belongs.”  A white man dealing with a sick dog is likely to elicit sympathy. A Native American man is presumed a robber. 
 
The sad irony in all of these cases is, the people who called police because they perceived people of color as inherently dangerous, wound up inflicting harm and humiliation on the very people they were afraid of.
 
It’s because of routine incidents like these that when people of color have actual reasons to call police — like facing direct threats or witnessing a crime — they often hesitate.
 
Laquonte Barry, a local Albuquerque father of two, understands this all too well. When he went into a convenience store last April to buy soft drinks with a friend, the cashier called him the “N-word” after Laquonte notified him that he was charged incorrectly. 
 
The cashier continued to provoke him with a barrage of verbal assaults, referring to him not only as the “N-word,” but also “boy.” 
 
“I just felt like I was belittled as a man,” says Laquonte.
 

 

“I just felt like I was belittled as a man,” says Laquonte.

The situation escalated when a second employee confronted the abusive cashier about his racist remarks, calling him “ignorant,” and a physical altercation broke out. Laquonte suddenly realized that he was in a potentially dangerous situation. Even though he was a blameless victim of racial discrimination, Laquonte didn’t stick around for the cops to come out of fear that, as a black man at the scene, police would immediately assume he was a perpetrator. For him, any interaction with police in the aftermath of a violent incident meant a risk of being thrown in jail and taken away from his two young sons. 
 
“Here I am a black man in this crazy world.  All he’s got to do is say ‘this man came in and tried to rob me,’ and now I have an attempted robbery charge. So I left.”
 
ACLU of New Mexico legal director Leon Howard sees Laquonte’s unwillingness to interact with police, even if only to provide testimony when a victim of a crime, as a typical response in an environment where people of color, especially black males, are disproportionately brutalized and killed by law enforcement. 
 
“Every day, white people call the police with full confidence that officers will come to their aid, even when their calls lack any legitimate basis,” said Howard.  “Even when, as many have noted in recent weeks, they treat police like “customer service.” Laquonte, after being the victim of a hate crime, believed he would actually be the target of police.  His experience reveals a much deeper issue about access to institutions.  Historically marginalized people simply do not view police as an agency that will help them, but as one that will reinforce racial inequality.” 
 
Most people’s experiences — like those of Mateo and Laquonte — are not caught on camera and viewed by the public. The recent spate of racial profiling cases in the headlines are only a small sample of the dangerous confrontations that people of color experience on a routine basis across our country. 
 
“We’re not as far along on the journey to being more enlightened people as we thought.  Not as blind to color, money, or class,” says Mateo. “It’s like a simmering posole pot. And I’m sure the heat has been turned up with Trump.  I’m sure the posole pot is overflowing at this point.”

 

“It’s like a simmering posole pot. And I’m sure the heat has been turned up with Trump.  I’m sure the posole pot is overflowing at this point.”

 
The posole pot is overflowing and the country can’t afford to look away, or these injustices will continue unabated. 
 
Mateo and Laquonte’s children will continue growing up in world where they are consistently at risk of someone calling the police on them for engaging in everyday activities. They are at risk of being subject to humiliating and harmful encounters with the police if they show up. 
 
Institutions like law enforcement never make these changes on their own initiative, however. Change and reform only ever comes from when we —the community of voters, activists, and advocates —flex our power and raise our voices to demand it. 

The ACLU of New Mexico currently represents Mateo Romero in a lawsuit against the Santa Fe Police Department for depriving him of his Fourth Amendment right to be free from arrest when no investigation was done to discern probable cause and for continuing to detain him after determining he hadn’t committed a crime. The ACLU of New Mexico recently settled its lawsuit on behalf of Laquonte Barry against the local convenience store for engaging in unlawful discriminatory practices. 

Both men hope that in talking about their experiences, they will bring awareness to the ongoing issue of racial discrimination so that lasting change can be made. 

“I think it’s the most important work right now— the struggle for the soul of the country,” says Mateo. “Is it going to be a place that loves people and embraces people?  Is it the land of the free? Is it ‘give me your tired, your hungry, and your poor’ or is the House of Commons and the House of Lords? Is it based on the color of your skin, or your gender? What is it going to be?”

 

 

This article originally appeard in the 2018 spring edition of The Torch. 

 

Date

Tuesday, August 21, 2018 - 3:15pm

Featured image

Mateo Romero working in his studio.

Show featured image

Hide banner image

Tweet Text

[node:title]

Related issues

Racial Justice Police Practices

Show related content

Menu parent dynamic listing

17

Style

Standard with sidebar

First Merrick Garland’s stolen seat, now Kennedy’s retirement. It’s a one-two gut punch that has left those of us who treasure the cause of freedom and equality deeply distressed about the direction that the U.S. Supreme Court will almost certainly take for the better part of a generation. Assuming that Trump’s pick for Kennedy’s replacement, Judge Brett Kavanaugh, is confirmed by the Republican-held Senate, the court will have a clear 5-4 majority of justices who are likely to be consistently hostile to reproductive freedom, LGBTQ+ rights, voting rights, privacy rights, immigrants’ rights, and the plight of the poor.

So what does this mean for us? Expanding freedoms through sweeping supreme court cases like Obergefell v. Hodges, the ACLU case that won the freedom to marry for same sex couples, and Doe v. Bolton, which, along with Roe v. Wade, established a woman’s right to abortion, is almost synonymous with the ACLU. Indeed, the ACLU appears before the U.S. Supreme Court more often than any other group or organization other than the federal government’s own Department of Justice. So what does the ACLU’s mission look like in an era where the highest court in the land is likely to be hostile to most of our entreaties?

Because of this new reality, I believe that in the coming years some of our greatest opportunities for defending and advancing freedoms in America will happen at the state level. For much of its history, the ACLU has built the legal infrastructure of freedom from the top down with these big historic supreme court cases. Now it is imperative we build from the ground up, starting in our own communities, in our own state courts and legislatures. We’ve already seen how effective that can be. Here in New Mexico, for example, the ACLU of New Mexico’s lawsuit Griego v. Oliver won the freedom to marry for New Mexicans in 2013, two years ahead of Obergefell v. Hodges. As U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis famously once stated, “States are the laboratories of democracy.” Even in the age of Trump, we have ample opportunity to build the kind of free and just society right here in New Mexico that we one day hope to see span from coast to coast.

The seismic shift in the makeup of the Supreme Court means we must also continue to look beyond the courts for opportunities to influence the future of freedom in our country. Since the advent of the Trump administration, the ACLU has made significant investments in its organizing and lobbying programs. Although we are a nonpartisan organization, meaning we don’t endorse specific candidates for office, that doesn’t mean we cannot wield significant political power and influence at every level of government. Here in New Mexico, we’re organizing our supporters around critical issues facing our communities, including protecting access to reproductive healthcare, reforming the Albuquerque police department, ending mass incarceration, and fighting Trump’s deportation machine.

This is not to say we can simply ignore the U.S. Supreme Court, however. It’s decisions will continue to have a profound impact on our lives. For example, if the court’s new majority sets its sights on overturning Roe v. Wade, it could have disastrous consequences for New Mexican women who rely on access to safe and legal abortion as an essential part of reproductive health care. As of this writing, pre-Roe language criminalizing abortion is still on New Mexico law books. Although New Mexico’s criminal abortion statute has been unenforceable since 1973, that could change if Roe was overturned. That’s why one of the ACLU of New Mexico’s top legislative priorities in 2019 will be to pass a bill through New Mexico’s legislature that will repeal this outdated, stigmatizing, and dangerous language from our criminal code. If the worst happens, we must ensure that women and families in New Mexico will continue to have access to the full range of reproductive health options, including safe and legal abortion.

In summation: yes, things look pretty bleak in the Supreme Court right now. But the ACLU is more than just a fierce Supreme Court litigator. In fact, at the ACLU’s founding in the early 20th century, the courts were so unsympathetic to civil liberties that the ACLU pursued litigation mostly in the hopes of exposing the courts’ hypocrisy. One of the ACLU’s earliest documents was a handbill produced in 1920 entitled Maintain Your Rights, which exhorted that “Rights can be maintained only by insisting upon them, --by organization, protest, demonstrations, test cases in the courts, and publicity.” 

The ACLU understood even then that litigation is but one of many tools that can be strategically employed to maintain one’s rights. What was true then remains true today. We have a lot of tools in our belt, and we’re ready to get to work.

 


This letter originally appeared in the 2018 Summer Torch. 

Date

Monday, August 20, 2018 - 3:00pm

Featured image

photo of a a man from the shoulders up wearing a blue shirt, tie, and black jacket

Show featured image

Hide banner image

Tweet Text

[node:title]

Show related content

Menu parent dynamic listing

17

Style

Standard with sidebar
"The agents didn’t say anything about where they were going to take my son,” said Samuel*, from behind a glass partition. “They just took him away.  And then they told me I was going to jail. I’ve never been to jail. This has never happened before.”
 
Three fathers, Samuel, Javier, and Mauricio, sat across from us choking back tears as they told us how the agents took their children.  With tired and wet eyes, they told us how much they missed their children. How no one from the government would tell them when they would see their children again or why they took them away. In June when Nia Rucker, ACLU-NM Policy Counsel and Regional Manager, and I visited the Otero County Processing Center, a private ICE detention facility in southern New Mexico where these fathers are being held, they had not seen their children in weeks. 
 
Samuel last saw his six-year-old son in a hielera — a temporary holding cell so cold that they are known as “iceboxes” in Spanish. He wept as he recalled lying on the cold, concrete floor with his son. Border Patrol agents came in and made the children line up against a wall opposite from the parents and then took them away. Powerless to stop them, all Samuel could do was hold his son in his gaze until he disappeared out of sight.
 
Samuel knew his son was detained somewhere in a children’s shelter. But when we met him, Samuel had only spoken with his young son twice, in part because he couldn’t afford the steep rates the for-profit prison charges for calls.  
 
When the Border Patrol agents came for Javier’s sevenyear-old, he tried to spare his young son by telling him agents were taking  him to play with other kids. In the weeks since he was taken away, Javier has only been allowed one call with his son—who he believes is somewhere in Phoenix.
 
For his part, Mauricio was struck by the coldness with which Border Patrol agents told him they were taking his 13-year-old son. 
 
“You will go to a prison for zero to six months,” the agent gruffly told Mauricio. “The boy will go to a shelter.”
 
At the time we met, Mauricio had not spoken with his child and didn’t even know where he was.
 
We’ve met with more than a dozen parents detained in Otero, Cibola, and El Paso detention facilities over the last few weeks, gathering testimony to support the ACLU’s class action lawsuit challenging the Trump administration’s practice of forcibly separating asylum-seeking parents and their young children.
 
Every parent we spoke with was consumed with grief. They were exhausted from sleepless nights spent in detention, listening to the echo of clanging metal doors and worrying about their children. And they were devastated by their own powerlessness to help them.
 
As the mother of a young son myself, my heart breaks for these parents. No parent should ever have their children taken from them and kept in prison-like conditions. But this is what our government has done to thousands of immigrant parents. No child should ever experience the terror and trauma of being ripped from their parent’s arms and taken away by uniformed strangers. But because of the Trump administration’s unspeakably cruel immigration policies, thousands have been.   

 

No child should ever experience the terror and trauma of being ripped from their parent’s arms and taken away by uniformed strangers. But because of the Trump administration’s unspeakably cruel immigration policies, thousands have been.   

 
By now, you too have doubtless glimpsed fragments of this calamity from the leaked audio recordings of young children crying for their parents, photographs of kids sleeping in chain-linked cages, and news stories of families fleeing persecution only to be torn apart. These heartrending stories have humanized this issue and fueled public outrage, leading to widespread condemnation from all sides. Even in deeply divided times such as these, the vast majority of Americans agree that tearing a child away from their parent is wrong.
 
The ACLU has been on the frontlines in fighting this administration’s unconscionable family separation policy every step of the way, filing a lawsuit in February on behalf of a Congolese mother who was separated from her seven-year-old daughter when she arrived in the U.S. to seek asylum. As a result of this lawsuit, a federal district court judge ordered the administration on June 26th to stop separating families and to reunite detained parents with children younger than five within 14 days, and older than five within 30 days. 
 
But the fight is far from over. 
 
With court orders and widespread public outrage blocking Trump’s preferred policy of family separation, the Trump administration has pivoted to a scheme of mass family detention where children and their parents would be detained together. Make no mistake, any solution that puts nursing mothers and children behind barbed wire is not a humane alternative. In a recent executive order, Trump instructed the Department of Defense to provide “any existing facilities available” to house the thousands of migrant and refugee families he intends to detain. This opens up the possibility that New Mexico’s numerous military facilities could be used as detention camps for parents and small children.
 
The Trump administration filed an emergency motion seeking changes in a 1997 settlement known as the “Flores Agreement,” which established strict limits on how long and under what conditions the government can keep children in immigration detention. Fortunately, Federal District Court Judge Golly Dee blocked the motion, calling the move, “a cynical attempt... to shift responsibility to the judiciary for over 20 years of congressional inaction and ill-considered executive action that have led to the current stalemate.” T
 
The truth is, despite what the Trump administration may say, ending family separation doesn’t require mass family detention as an alternative. It is a false choice that we reject.
 
Although family separation and family detention have focused the nation’s attention on how cruel our immigration policies can be, these are only the most extreme and visible symptoms of an immigration system that is fundamentally at odds with the values and constitutional protections our nation claims to hold dear. Our country claims to be a place of refuge, but when people fleeing violence come to our door seeking shelter, we lock them away in for-profit prisons. Our country claims to offer constitutional protections to everyone, but denies basic due process to asylum seekers.
 
People detained on immigration charges and people seeking asylum often spend months, if not years, separated from their families while they wait for their cases to wind their way through the courts. The detention facilities that they are held in are often located in extremely isolated areas, hours away from the nearest immigration attorney. Consequently, many immigration detainees do not have access to counsel at all. Indeed, the U.S. government sees no problem with detainees as young as three-years-old representing themselves in their own immigration cases. 
 
Sometimes problems like this can seem too big, too daunting for us as individuals to tackle. But we can’t let up. Here in New Mexico, we must hold our public officials accountable for the trauma and harm the Trump administration and private prisons are inflicting on immigrant families in our state. On July 16, our state legislators took an important first step by holding a hearing on how our state government can oversee private prisons that detain immigrants in New Mexico. 
 
We’ve got a long way to go, but every step we take towards blocking inhumane immigration policies and dismantling the current system of injustice has an impact on people’s lives—people like Samuel who we met in detention. Samuel’s wife Elena called a couple of nights ago from Honduras. 
 
“Samuel heard that he and our son are going to be reunited soon. Ojalá que sí,” said Elena. 
 
We hope so too. The last time we saw him, Samuel said that when he and his son are reunited, he would send us a photograph of his son, and I promised that I would send him one of mine.
 
*All of the fathers’ names in this story have been changed to protect their identities.
 

This article originally appeard in the 2018 spring edition of The Torch. 

 
 
 

 

Date

Sunday, August 19, 2018 - 2:45pm

Featured image

Young child grabbing his parent's leg, crying

Show featured image

Hide banner image

Tweet Text

[node:title]

Related issues

Immigrants’ Rights

Show related content

Menu parent dynamic listing

17

Style

Standard with sidebar

Pages

Subscribe to ACLU of New Mexico RSS