A

merica’s gun culture, with its Sec-

ond Amendment extremism, is kill-

ing our children. It also threatens

an essential precondition for de-

mocracy: its public space. The forti-

fication of the public realm, which accelerated

after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, is

likely to speed up once again as designers

respond to citizens’ fear of mass shootings.

Gun violence is reaching ever deeper into

zones traditionally deemed safe — public

schools, hospitals, houses of worship and

entertainment venues — and so architects may

be forced to undo or subvert values that have

governed the profession over the past century.

Ideals of openness, flow, transparency and

access will no longer be sustainable. Every-

thing must be “hardened.”

The word and its variants became a mantra

after the shooting in Uvalde, Tex., as politi-

cians dedicated to a no-limits gun culture

struggled to define a response to the May 24

mass murder of schoolchildren and their

teachers. “Schools should be the single hardest

target in our country,” said former president

Donald Trump at the annual National Rifle

Association convention, held only days after

the Uvalde massacre. He was repeating and

amplifying the response of other politicians

who champion the Second Amendment above

all other civic virtues: that schools fortify their

entrances even to the point, as Sen. Ted Cruz

(R-Tex.) advocated, of single-entry buildings.

“We also know that there are best practices at

federal buildings and courthouses, where for

security reasons they limit the means of entry

to one entrance,” said Cruz. “Schools, likewise,

should have a single point of entry. Fire exits

should only open out. At that single point of

entry, we should have multiple armed police

officers. Or if need be, military veterans

trained to provide security and keep our

children safe.”

It’s not hard to imagine what this will look

like, and how it will be extended from schools

to hospitals, shopping centers and places of

worship. Access to routine medical appoint-

ments will require the sick, frail and elderly to

wait in line to pass through magnetometers

and single-entry portals bristling with armed

guards. Plan to arrive at your church, syna-

gogue or mosque extra early, to get through

armored checkpoints. And perhaps this will be

the death knell for retail shopping. Why queue

for 20 minutes to enter a department store

when you can just order online?

The rapid embrace of the “hardening”

rhetoric shows how quickly we are rethinking

the basic aesthetics of our built environment.

In November 2001, only weeks after the

terrorist attacks in New York, Pennsylvania

and Washington, former senator Daniel Pat-

rick Moynihan of New York echoed the Peri-

clean ideal of democracy when he said: “Archi-

tecture is inescapably a political art, and it

reports faithfully for ages to come what the

political values of a particular era were. Surely,

ours must be openness and fearlessness in the

face of those who hide in the darkness.”

Today, to maintain the primacy of the

constitutional right to bear arms, some politi-

SEE ARCHITECTURE ON B2

KLMNO

Outlook

SUNDAY, JUNE 12 , 2022. WASHINGTONPOST.COM/OUTLOOK. SECTION B EZ BD

INSIDE BOOK WORLD

How racism undermines

Black health. B5

Gay Washington, through

a straight lens. B6

INSIDE OUTLOOK

JESS SUTTNER FOR THE WASHINGTON POST

E

ach new mass shooting makes gun-

control activists more passionate

and more determined, but they

grow understandably frustrated when

their efforts don’t translate into policy

reform. Their movement can learn some-

thing — and take encouragement — from

an unlikely source: the antiabortion

movement, which is now scoring major

victories after a very long struggle.

Nearly 50 years ago, when Roe v. Wade

was decided, antiabortion activists faced

a political landscape at least as hostile to

their aims as the one now confronting the

gun-control movement. A 7-to-2 Supreme

Court decision immediately changed laws

across the country, explicitly blocking the

prohibition of abortion. Although reli-

gious activists mourned the decision, or-

ganized opposition was initially limited.

Building from a base in the Catholic

Church and the National Right to Life

Committee, which had fought the relax-

ing of state abortion laws since 1968, the

movement formed a committed and resil-

ient infrastructure, allowing for sustained

activism and strategic and tactical inno-

vation.

For decades, the movement lost far

more than it won on its long and compli-

cated path toward political influence.

Some of its lessons are counterintuitive.

Public support, for example, is an asset,

but it’s not all that matters. The antiabor-

tion movement never enjoyed majority

backing in polls, yet it has won policy

victories even while losing public support.

The first lesson, then, is don’t depend

on public opinion. Majorities are often

ignored or defeated; intensely dedicated

activists and voters can win out if majori-

ties don’t have as strong a commitment.

Ending abortion became the most critical

issue for nearly a third of potential voters

who identified as “pro-life,” according to a

Gallup survey. Far fewer abortion rights

supporters, though, made the issue their

top priority.

Gun-control activists can draw on a

broader base of public support, but it’s

more important to get people to act on

SEE GUNS ON B3

Gun-control

activists can

learn from Roe

opponents

Partial victories and diverse

tactics are critical, says

sociologist David S. Meyer

American fortress

‘Hardening’ the built environment in the name of safety is antithetical

to the democratic ideal of public space, writes The Post’s Philip Kennicott

case — “give me your tired, your poor,

your huddled masses” — and an eco-

nomic one, arguing that immigrants have

the potential to fuel the economy.

The reality is that immigration debates

are often driven more by feelings than

facts. And there is often disagreement

about basic facts — such as how immigra-

tion has evolved over time, how success-

ful immigrants become once they enter

the United States and how they affect the

communities they enter. The problem is,

in part, a lack of accessible empirical

evidence on the topic.

Enter “Streets of Gold: America’s Un-

told Story of Immigrant Success,” a book

by economic historians Ran Abramitzky

and Leah Boustan that seeks to set the

record straight, using an economics tool

kit and a treasure trove of data. Their

mission is twofold. First, to offer a data-

SEE IMMIGRATION ON B4

tives about immigration. In 2016, Presi-

dent Barack Obama voiced his view that

“America is stronger because of immi-

grants, America is great because of immi-

grants.” Announcing his presidential bid,

Donald Trump offered a bleaker perspec-

tive, arguing that immigrants from Mexi-

co “have lots of problems, and they’re

bringing those problems.... T hey’re

bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime.”

Advocates of further restrictions on

entry into the United States often cite

concerns that immigrants might take

jobs that would otherwise go to other

Americans, strain public resources and

create a permanent underclass of unas-

similated families who never catch up.

This has led to a particular focus on

restricting entry by poorer immigrants

and those from what Trump infamously

referred to as “s---hole countries.” Propo-

nents of immigration make both a moral

Book review by

Michael Luca

R

oughly 1.8 million people have been

turned away at the U.S.-Mexico

border since March 2020, when the

Trump administration invoked Title 42 —

a public health order that allows Border

Patrol agents to deny migrants entry to

inhibit the spread of the coronavirus.

Under the policy, agents can quickly expel

the migrants without allowing them to

seek asylum. The Biden administration’s

intention to lift this restriction has set off

renewed debate about the value of immi-

gration and derailed plans for broader

immigration reform.

This is just the latest episode in a

raging battle marked by divergent narra-

What the data really says about immigration

Do red-flag laws violate

due process? B3

The Jan. 6 hearings

should look ahead. B2