418 CHAPTER 13|CIVIL RIGHTS
Decisions to establish English as the offi cial language in many states have had
wide-reaching consequences. For example, the Supreme Court upheld an Alabama
state law requiring that the state driver’s license test be conducted only in English.
A Mexican immigrant sued under Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, claiming
that the Alabama law had a disparate impact on non-English-speaking residents.
However, the Court held in Alexander v. Sandoval (2001) that individuals may not
sue federally funded state agencies over policies that have a discriminatory eff ect
on minorities under Title VI.^68 This decision has far-reaching consequences for
the use of the Civil Rights Act to fi ght patterns of discrimination, especially in
education policy (for example, civil rights advocates have challenged the use of
standardized testing because of its disparate impact on minorities) and environ-
mental policy (lawsuits brought under Title VI have alleged “environmental rac-
ism” in decisions to site hazardous waste dumps in predominantly minority areas).
Immigration regained center stage after the September 11 terrorist attacks, when
some people saw immigration as a threat that must be curtailed. The government
asserted that it would not engage in racial profi ling of Arab Americans—for exam-
ple, subjecting them to stricter screening at airports—but many commentators
argued that such profi ling would be justifi ed, and there was at least anecdotal evi-
dence of increased discrimination against people of Middle Eastern descent.
Recently, immigration has been central in many political debates. Some are
nominally about social welfare benefi ts, but deeper racial issues often are just
below the surface. For example, in 1994 voters in California adopted Proposition
187, which denied most public benefi ts to illegal immigrants but seemed to critics to
discriminate against Mexican Americans. Debates over immigration have impor-
tant political implications. Republicans supported Proposition 187, while Demo-
crats opposed it. When the courts struck down the measure and Democrats won
the 1998 gubernatorial race in California with the support of the growing Hispanic
population, Republicans softened their position. President George W. Bush culti-
vated the Hispanic vote, often presenting part of his speeches in Spanish, and won
a record (for Republican presidential candidates) 44 percent of the Latino vote in- Bush pushed for comprehensive immigration reform in 2006. However, anti-
immigration Republicans in Congress passed a measure aimed at enforcing exist-
ing immigration laws and building a barrier along the border with Mexico. Strong
Latino turnout in 2006 is credited, in part, with a return of control of Congress to
the Democrats, and Obama won 67 percent of the Latino vote in 2008.
The immigration debate intensifi ed in 2010 when Arizona enacted an anti-
immigration law that requires local law enforcement offi cials to check the immigra-
tion status of a person in a “lawful stop, detention, or arrest” if there is a “reasonable
suspicion” that the person is an illegal alien. The law also requires immigrants to
always carry papers and bans people without proper documents
from seeking work in public places. Opponents of the law argue that
it requires illegal racial profi ling and that the federal government has
the sole responsibility for deciding immigration law. As noted earlier,
the Supreme Court struck down three of the four main provisions of
the law, citing the supremacy clause of the Constitution. This meant
that Congress, not the states, decides immigration law when the two
laws confl ict. The Court upheld the controversial “show me your
papers” part of the law, saying that the state was simply enforcing the
federal law. However, the Court indicated that the law must be applied
in a race-neutral way and could be struck down if there was clear evi-
dence of racial profi ling.^69 Several months later a federal district court
judge cleared the way for implementation of the “show me your papers”
BORDER PATROL AGENTS DETAIN
undocumented immigrants
apprehended near the Mexican
border outside McAllen, Texas.
Illegal immigration continues to
be a “hot-button” issue in national
electoral and legislative politics.