A key part of the national conversation over immigration reform and Arizona’s S.B. 1070 is coming to Delaware this weekend.
I am honored to be co-hosting a screening of the documentary film 9500 Liberty at Wilmington’s Theater N on the evening of Friday, July 2d at 8 pm. The screening will be followed by a panel discussion on immigration reform featuring Maria Velasquez from Voices Without Borders, Eliud Gautier, New Jersey Coordinator of Esperanza for America, and I. We’ll also be joined by two of the film’s producers, Annabel Park, an award-winning filmmaker and founder of Coffee Party USA, and University of Delaware alumnus Jeff Man!
The film tells the story of a 2008 local enforcement ordinance passed in Prince William County, Virginia, that required police to check the immigration status of those they had “probable cause” to suspect were undocumented immigrants. ”Despite a climate of fear and racial tension, ordinary citizens banded together to ask lawmakers to repeal the controversial ‘probable cause’ mandate. They succeeded with an inventive combination of Internet and grassroots advocacy, pointing to the law’s unexpectedly negative economic impact, and the costly law suits that would burden taxpayers.”
Given the obvious parallels to Arizona’s S.B. 1070, it’s not surprising that the film has received extensive coverage in Arizona. Indeed, according to the producers, business and “law enforcement leaders in Arizona, Texas, California, and around the country have championed 9500 LIBERTY for its fact-based, even-handed account of the economic and public safety impacts of laws like S.B. 1070.”
Aside from the national implications of reform, the film is particularly relevant now here in Delaware given the efforts to introduce legislation modeled on S.B. 1070 or other local enforcement ordinances in Dover.
From the Theater N website:
9500 Liberty
Showdates: July 2-4
Showtimes: Fri 8pm, Sat 5pm, Sun 2pm
Length (in minutes): 80
A film by Eric Byler and Annabel Park.
The 8 pm screening on Friday will be followed by a panel discussion with two of the film’s producers- Jeff Man and Annabel Park. Park is also one of the co-founders of the Coffee Party.
The panel will include Michael Stafford, Wilmington attorney and writer on the center-right blog “Delaware Tomorrow, ” Maria Velasquez from Voices Without Borders and Eliud Gautier, New Jersey Coordinator of Esperanza for America.
“It’s as powerful a booster of the democratic process as anything Frank Capra ever imprinted into our collective memory.” -Washington Post
Prince William County, Virginia becomes ground zero in America’s explosive battle over immigration policy when elected officials adopt a law requiring police officers to question anyone they have “probable cause” to suspect is an undocumented immigrant, almost an exact copy of the current bill that was just passed in Arizona, SB-1070.
Alarmed by a climate of fear and racial division, residents form a resistance using YouTube videos and virtual town halls, setting up a real-life showdown in the seat of county government.
Immigration reform is one of the most vexing and emotionally divisive issues facing our nation. If you are interested in learning about this issue and being part of the search for a real solution, then this is an event you can’t miss. The panel discussion, in particular, features individuals with a unique range and depth of experience on immigration policy from across the political spectrum.
Winston Churchill once said: “Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.” God willing, we’ll all be doing a little of both Friday night!
Please accept this invitation to participate in one of the most important national public policy conversations taking place in America today; join us this Friday evening at Theater N.
{ 15 comments }
Wow Mike, great balance. A bunch of amnesty supporters and yourself. Thanks for a fair and balanced presentation.
I think I get you sometimes, TW, then you put a comment like that and I remember why you’re on DP. Your comment could sum up that former blog site of mine. A bunch of intolerant of center conservatives and you. Thanks for a fair and balanced presentation.
Smitty,
who on this panel is taking a view opposite of Mike???
Why is Mike so afraid of inviting an opposing point of view???
If we are going to have an honest discussion let’s invite people who oppose our point of view.
So now it’s a naughty, awful, thing to do events on an issue that provide a perspetive you disagree with? If I go to a tea party rally and don’ hear a speaker presenting a pro-obama view, is it becasue they are “scared,” or it it because I’m at a tea party rally and they have ever right to present their views on lower taxes and reduced government? lol Its so transparently silly with you man.
Rather then saying, “hey, I disagree with you, and here is why…. ” you instead throw the equivalent of a temper tantrum.
Wrong. Take Esperanza for example- that’s the nation’s largest Hispanic faith-based organization. I had the great honor of traveling to DC with them for the press conference announcing their “Esperanza for America” campaign in support of reform last March and had the chance to participate in meetings with much of our Congressional leadership. Grover Norquist, a name I’m sure you recognize, was one of the speakers. Yes, the guy that helped author the “Contract with America” is a *huge* and *passionate* supporter of reform. Galen Carey from the National Assication of Evangelicals was there as well -great guy, soild conservative… and another supporter of reform.
Eliud, the NJ Coordiantor for the group, is a very good friend; he’s as conservative as anybody you’ll ever meet- and he has been involved in Republican politics over in Jersey for years.
And, to go back to that word “amnesty”- sorry, earned legalization isn’t an amnesty, no matter how many times you call it that. The vast majority of people who support reform *also* support ehnaced border security and internal enforcement- indeed, all the reform proposals that have been floated in DC (Graham/Schumer, for example, and Sen. Reid’s framework) are primarily focused on the border and internal enforcement.
Oh, and *spoiler alert*…. the “hero” of the movie is a REPUBLICAN- a local official who finally had the courage to say enough’s enough.
Sorry Mike, but the devil is always in the details. Throwing out conservative names who participated in a meeting about “reform” means little in my book. I have no idea what they said or the spcifics of where they come from. I only have your word that they showed up and supported your concept. If a liberal proposes a good idea, i will endorse it. If a conservative proposes a bad idea I oppose it. (something I do all the time at DP). I don’t march in lockstep with Grover Norquist or anyone else. So I will await the specifics of a proposal before I comment. In the mean time I want our Executive Branch to actually enforce existing law. For some reason Mike and Smitty refuse to consider this as an option.
The fact is you have no compteting views at your forum at the Meriedith Theatre. If your presentation and movie are so compelling why not invite some folks who could have a change of heart???
Here’s an idea.. before suggesting that its all part of some hallucinatory “acid flashback” on my part- though I guess I’m honored that you imagine me hallucinating about DC press conferences and Grover Norquist, try Google searching “Grover Norquist” and “immigration reform.” Next, try “Galen Carey” and “immigration reform.”
….. and there you go.
If that’s not enough, I have a picture of Grover and I at that press conference! lol Wait… even better, I have an entire album of pics from the trip that’s been up on Facebook for months!
And I quoted a long excerpt from an article by Galen just last week on a blog post you commented on. And the comment you reply to contains a link to a prior blog on RD, about that press conference (complete with some of the pictures) and a lengthy talkabout the specifics of reform.
So, its a bit more then “my word”… isn’t it?
As to enforcement- you do realize that we totally support both internal enforcement and border security, right? The problem is what to do with about 11 to 12 million people that are already here and, in most cases, have been here for a long time. we’re not going to locate,apprehend, and remove the equivalent of Pennsylvania TW.
You also write: “If your presentation and movie are so compelling why not invite some folks who could have a change of heart???”
Honestly, you seem to be so close-minded on this issue that it is impairing your ability to read- anybody is invited to attend.. at the end of the blog it says: “Winston Churchill once said: ‘Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.’ God willing, we’ll all be doing a little of both Friday night!” That is about as open an invitation to dialog as one can make.
Gee Mike I guess you never actually read what I said. Candidly I really don’t take my orders from Grover Norquist. I know this will confuse you as you want to typecast anyone who disagrees with you but I make my own mind up based on facts and not who you claim endorses your ideas.
The fact is you are showing a movie to advance your immigration agenda. The fact is all of your panel share your views. You have not invited a single opponent such as John Jaremchuk. You know th guy you just chose to ignore him. SHAME!!!!!
This is not an honest discussion of opposing ideas. Your so called movie and forum is nothing but cheerleading for breaking American immigration laws under the guise of reform.
Tell me who on your so called panel is opposed to your concepts of reform??????????
If you want to have an honest discussion at least do the decency of inviting those who oppose your ideas. You have not done so.
Geez, take a chill pill, TW. And you have a whole lot to say for someone who hasn’t even seen the movie. You also have no idea what the discussion would consist. Seems like you’re guilty of what you’re accusing others.
TW, you write- “Gee Mike I guess you never actually read what I said. Candidly I really don’t take my orders from Grover Norquist. I know this will confuse you as you want to typecast anyone who disagrees with you but I make my own mind up based on facts and not who you claim endorses your ideas.”
Ummm, ok. You specifically implied that I made up the fact that Grover Norquist spoke about reform at a press conference in DC. Your words: “I have no idea what they said or the spcifics of where they come from. I only have your word that they showed up and supported your concept.”
I provied the specifics and a link to photos of the event. And now I’m typecasting you? And by quoting any conservative or Republican who supports reform, I’m somehow implying that you take your marching orders from the? It’s laughable.
I mention Galen and Grover for two reasons- first, because as conservatives, their arguments are framed in a way that may persuade and resonate with you or with others. Second, because noting the fact that prominant conservative and religious leaders support reform dispels the assumption that only liberals or democrats do.
As to criticisng the event- honestly, could you be just a bit more disengenuous? Indeed, you literally seem to make it us as you go along. We put together an event about immigration reform- and it was very well attended by the way. We had people from both the left and the right. Yes, all the panelists supported reform (though there are differences among us in the details)- but that was the point of the event, to provide a new perspective and help generate an informed discussion. We took questions from the packed audience for hours, till like 11:30, and the majority of the audience stayed for the whole discussion. You should have come.
“Your so called movie and forum is nothing but cheerleading for breaking American immigration laws under the guise of reform.” lol I don’t do pompoms TW, not my style. Reform affirms the rule of law, you are free to disagree with me about that of course. Also, it’s not my movie- but it’s one that tells an important story about a community literally getting torn apart over a local enforcement ordinance. A story that can serve as an basis for a deeper discussion about this issue.
At the risk of another spoiler- the ordinance that caused the ruckus directed local law enforcement to investigate the immigration status of anyone it had “probable cause” to believe was an illegal. But what the heck is probable cause in that context- an accent, a persons appearence, seeming “foriegn” or different, liking soccer? In the end, they junked the ordiannce, and adopted a new policy- they decided to check the immigration status of everyone arrested for a crime. That hardly sounds to me like “cheerleading for breaking American immigration laws”- but again, I don’t do pompoms.
I am opposed to comprehensive immigration reform (CIR) that doesn’t protect our borders and doesn’t punish those that have violated the law. I am opposed to CIR that continues to attract “illegals” from taking jobs that American citizens would do for a fair wage. I am opposed to CIR that provides amnesty to undocumented, illegal immigrants that have entered with the goal of destroying our country and economy.
But we have to all admit that something needs to be done with a broken down antiquated immigration legislation that isn’t being enforce (or are unenforceable, economically) by any local, state or federal government.
We must admit that the human flaw of racial profiling associated with current legislations and/or ordinances and the false amnesty portrayal of proposed legislation must be eradicated from our practices and languages in order to have a debate about a fair and just comprehensive immigration reform.
And when I mean fair and just – it is for the American Citizens. We can’t pass this law under threads of economic claps as indicated in the film “9500Liberty” or under the thread of economic boycotts to the State of Arizona. Placing a gun to an individual, township, county, state or country is no way to pass any successful and long lasting legislation.
So, you may not agree with what and how Mike did this event – but where were all the anti-immigration folks – when a fair and balanced discussion is needed – right now – in all corners of our country. Should Mike have waited to vet this entire process with you all before he launched this event? Well, shame on all those that haven’t had a perfect immigration debate at all – at least we tried and you can’t blame us for this.
I was at this screening – and I disagree with a lot of the film-makers point of view. She didn’t do a fair and balanced film but where are the pro-lifers, anti-immigrants, same sex marriage film makers and debate coordinators within our community that would dare to do what Mike did on Friday night, right before one of the largest American celebration – the 4th of July.
So criticize the event all you want and name call me all you want – at least I was there to defend my point of view and support the attempt of a good republican in DE – for daring to care about this country.
“I am opposed to comprehensive immigration reform (CIR) that doesn’t protect our borders and doesn’t punish those that have violated the law. I am opposed to CIR that continues to attract “illegals” from taking jobs that American citizens would do for a fair wage. I am opposed to CIR that provides amnesty to undocumented, illegal immigrants that have entered with the goal of destroying our country and economy.”
Amen, as you know I’m in 100% agreement!
As to the film, my thought was that it was a useful segway into a discussion about these issues- a “conversation” starting point about the experience of one community that touched on so many of the common themes and threads in this debate. And that’s exactly what I think we got Friday night. Take, for example, the way the way we used the concluding scene of the film discussing PWC’s vote for Obama in the 2008 election as a basis for compairing his immigration policy (or lack thereof) with Bush’s push for reform in 2007. Or how we were able to bring big labor’s traidtional opposition to immigration legislation into the discussion as well.
In the end, for me, it all goes back to crafting a rational policy- one which has broad legitimacy and avoids dehumanizing, poisonous rhetoric; one which heals, rather then tears, fissures in our communities. I don’t want to ever see what played out in PWC occur here in Delaware.
Also, though the panel presented contrasting views on some aspects of reform & immigration policy, I was very impressed by the civil and informed nature of the discussion. The questions and comments from the audience were great, and totally devoid of any name calling, sloganeering, or heated rhetoric- it was a calm, informed policy discussion. Exactky the kind of dailog we need to have to really *solve* these problems.
I’m going to post later this week setting forth my own proposals on reform- and the questions I think we ought to be asking ourselves to guide the discussion.
I wonder, how is it that such a small (>5%) of the total population can “destroy” our country? What I see “destroying” our country is an unfair trade policy that has made America a consumer based economy with no real balance of manufacturing the product here. What I see “destroying” our country is a financial system that has no real oversight and the capability of creating a global economic meltdown while only a minute upper echelon make money hand over fist at the expense of us regular folks. What I see “destroying” our country is an energy paradigm that results in BP catastophes.
So, NO, I don’t understand investing our limited resources in immigration enforcement which requires billions and billions of dollars in addition to our collective energy to solve more pressing problems.
Just my humble perspective.
Far too many people are out there saying no amnesty, no CIR, seal the border, enforce the laws, blah blah blah. There are over 10 million illegal immigrants out there somewhere. Those of you who want change had better come up with some solutions rather than the tired old rhetoric that offers no solutions.
In order to fix the problems that so many people find unacceptable, compromise is going to have to happen. Change is going to have to be made.
We are the blog that fought back in Prince William County.
Eric and Annabel are the Bomb! They should run for President and Vice President and FORTIFY our United States!!
Hope to see you soon in Arizona where we need your help!
Good luck in Delaware
Comments on this entry are closed.
{ 1 trackback }