the "sundown agenda"

[alyaza]

Alyaza Birze (January 25)

Where the state in the early twentieth century appeared weak because of its lack of control of the metropolis (to which fascists responded by marching through the cities), the state in the early twenty-first century appears weak because it apparently does not control its borders (the actual massive accretion of border technologies notwithstanding). This is why migration politics, although not a major part of the state’s total activities, is so important for far-right movements which contest the power of the state[...]
—Sam Moore and Alex Roberts, The Rise of Ecofascism: Climate Change and the Far Right

as immigration politics continue to spiral and the Trump administration begins to gear up for "large-scale" immigration raids in major US cities, it seems prudent to begin outlining something i call the "sundown agenda". in short, the sundown agenda is the overarching effort to de facto recriminalize being a visible minority. this effort largely models itself after the sundown town (and an oft-associated, infamous exhortation: 'Nigger, don't let the sun set on your head'), hence my name for it

like many portions of the contemporary right, this agenda takes an amorphous form that is both disorganized and centralized at the same time. the broader belief that certain kinds of people should neither be seen nor heard is centrally accepted across most of the right—in many respects it informs what the right does and why—but how this should be accomplished is scattershot. this is fortunate in many ways (a consensus on this subject can be intensely damaging: see the push against trans people for instance) but unfortunate in others (it is hard to fully grasp the scope of the problem, and in many cases fighting this agenda is fighting only one head).

illustrating the latter point, consider the apparent ICE raids against Diné (Navajo) citizens and the recent Trump administration argument for ending birthright citizenship that seemingly rest upon overturning American citizenship for natives too. it would be understandable to see these as completely unrelated events—but from my perspective, they both belie a fundamental axiom of the right-wing that groups like Native Americans are "apart from" the United States and can only become American through total assimilation. it is this system of beliefs that allows one to argue “The United States’ connection with the children of illegal aliens and temporary visitors is weaker than its connection with members of Indian tribes. If the latter link is insufficient for birthright citizenship, the former certainly is.” without shame; and it is that system which sees unlawful detention of Diné by ICE (forcing them to prove their citizenship and place in this country they were forced to join, rather than forcing ICE to demonstrate they are in some way undocumented immigrants) as acceptable.

state-level contributions to the sundown agenda

the apparent raids in Arizona and arguments by the Trump administration for banning birthright citizenship are obviously big problems; but just as alarming for many people are state-level contributions to this agenda. this post was actually inspired by one: Wyoming, which i have already detailed for its fossil fascists, is likely to pass a bill (HB 116) "invalidat[ing] driver licenses issued to unauthorized immigrants by other states" in the coming days. although dubiously constitutional and apparently ambiguous on legal penalties, what is not unambiguous is the bill making it de facto illegal for undocumented immigrants to drive alone in Wyoming (whether they are residents of the state or merely driving through). per the reporting of WyoFile:

Law enforcement chiefs interviewed by WyoFile said they weren’t entirely certain if undocumented immigrants driving with such licenses would be detained. In many cases, they said, offenders would be issued a ticket then — if someone else could take the wheel — travel on. But if not, they may end up stranded or, if there are other criminal charges, even jailed. “If you don’t have a driver’s license you can’t drive,” said Col. Tim Cameron, who directs the Wyoming Highway Patrol. “They would need an alternative method of transportation or another driver.”

even more concerning are other measures that Wyoming could potentially take up. HB 133, another bill introduced by a Wyoming Freedom Caucus member, would completely ban sanctuary policies (there are none in Wyoming) and defund polities which attempt to pass them. but it would also "charge government officials who don’t cooperate with federal immigration authorities with a felony"—an incredibly punitive and almost certainly unconstitutional measure designed to silence elected officials with sympathies to undocumented immigrants. Wyoming is not the only state considering such a bill either: in Tennessee, where sanctuary policies are already banned, a new sweeping anti-immigration bill threatens to criminalize even voting for a sanctuary policy. under this bill, doing so would "become a Class E Felony and grounds for removal from office."

obviously, the harm of bills which make it illegal to vote the "wrong" way are immense, and they are yet another step toward democratic backsliding whether they pass or not. i will reiterate that they are also almost certainly unconstitutional—it seems inconceivable to me that any court could ever legitimize making it illegal to vote a certain way when you serve on a democratically elected body, at least not without precipitating a disastrous constitutional crisis. but the right is willing to test the legal system on this subject.

there are also the bills intended to stoke fear, and which you might call an unusual form of stochastic terrorism. in Mississippi, an immigrant bounty bill (modeled after a similar one in Missouri) has been making news; although likely unworkable for at least a dozen reasons and unlikely to be taken up, the bill certainly makes it feel like criminalization (even potentially at the hands of a private actor) could happen anywhere.

what you can do about it

all of this is fightable—most of it should be legally inactionable, and will presumably be challenged on that basis. but it's important to get organized and be organized against this reaction; on the legislative, legal, and labor side there should be proactive efforts to ensure that undocumented immigrants are shielded through sanctuary policies, and consistent resistance against any policies that would jeopardize this status. undocumented immigrants should be made aware of their rights in advance (see Arise Chicago's toolkit for immigrant workers and Immigrant Legal Resource Center: Red Cards as just two resources) and given resources to lean on if they are detained (NNIRR's hotlines for example). if you can, you should join a broad organization like DSA or volunteer your skillset to an organization which will have it. in short: there's a lot you can do right now, but you must be the person who chooses to do it.