Arizona Senate Bill 1070 was signed into law on April 23, 2010 by Gov. Jan Brewer. In summary, it states that it is a misdemeanor crime for an illegal alien to be in Arizona without having the proper legal documents, and that state law enforcement officers should determine a person's immigration status when there is reasonable suspicion that they are in the United States illegally. This expanded state police power to ask about the immigration status of anyone they happen to stop. According to a New York Times article, the goal of the Arizona state government was to discourage illegal immigrants from entering or staying in the state. This legislation has been criticized as encouraging racial profiling, and taken to The Supreme Court as its legality has been questioned. In June of 2012, The Supreme Court approved the "show me your papers" aspect of the law, allowing police officers to demand any immigrant they stop to provide legal documents proving that they are in the country legally, while striking down most of the other parts of the law (see this article for more on the Supreme Court's decision). In another New York Times article, Justice Antonin Scalia said that states have the right to formulate an immigration policy if the federal government is not enforcing theirs, referring to the Obama administration's "inability to deport many illegal immigrants who came to the United States as children." Due to its controversial nature, Arizona SB 1070 has been under heavy media scrutiny. News organizations have been covering the issue heavily for the last year or so, stirring up public opinions on the subject. These cartoons illustrate the controversy and "battle" between the Supreme Court and Arizona.
Team Member Name: Manda Perkins
Publication: Mobile Register
Register Date: June
Cartoonist: J.D. Crowe (U.S.)
Title of the cartoon: Arizona Immigration Law Flesh Wound
Cartoon #: N/A
What action is taking place in the cartoon? What is the context?
This cartoon is a spin-off of the movie Monty Python and the Holy Grail. The Supreme Court is slowly hacking away at Arizona's new immigration law, which is highly unpopular among liberal critics. The bloody Arizona stump somehow thinks he is still winning the fight, stating, "Had enough?"
Tone of the cartoon:
1) Positive framing of undocumented immigrants
2) Negative framing of immigration policies
What “reality” is constructed/framed about immigration/immigrants?
Because Arizona SB1070 was so highly controversial and deemed unconstitutional by many, the Supreme Court has been trying to revise it, taking out provisions from the law. Despite the controversial law, it looks as if the Arizona state government isn't backing down. CNN reports that although the Supreme Court has rejected some key parts of the law, they have decided to allow a controversial part, which is allowing "police to check a person's immigration status while enforcing other laws." The cartoonist is clearly trying to depict the ravishing that the Arizona immigration law has taken at the hand of the Supreme Court, and yet Arizona refuses to admit its defeat.
Team Member Name: Manda Perkins
Publication: Mobile Register
Register Date: June
Cartoonist: J.D. Crowe (U.S.)
Title of the cartoon: Arizona Immigration Law Flesh Wound
Cartoon #: N/A
What action is taking place in the cartoon? What is the context?
This cartoon is a spin-off of the movie Monty Python and the Holy Grail. The Supreme Court is slowly hacking away at Arizona's new immigration law, which is highly unpopular among liberal critics. The bloody Arizona stump somehow thinks he is still winning the fight, stating, "Had enough?"
Tone of the cartoon:
1) Positive framing of undocumented immigrants
2) Negative framing of immigration policies
What “reality” is constructed/framed about immigration/immigrants?
Because Arizona SB1070 was so highly controversial and deemed unconstitutional by many, the Supreme Court has been trying to revise it, taking out provisions from the law. Despite the controversial law, it looks as if the Arizona state government isn't backing down. CNN reports that although the Supreme Court has rejected some key parts of the law, they have decided to allow a controversial part, which is allowing "police to check a person's immigration status while enforcing other laws." The cartoonist is clearly trying to depict the ravishing that the Arizona immigration law has taken at the hand of the Supreme Court, and yet Arizona refuses to admit its defeat.
Team Member Name: Alex Jeppesen
Publication: N/A
Date: 2012
Date: 2012
Cartoonist: Joz Heller (U.S.)
Title of the cartoon: Fifty Shades of Brown
Cartoon #: N/A
Cartoon #: N/A
What action is taking place in
the cartoon? What is the context?
The Statue of Liberty is reading a book called Fifty Shades of Brown after the results of the Supreme Court’s decision on Arizona immigration laws. The Statue of Liberty's is a reference to the popular novel Fifty Shades of Grey.
The Statue of Liberty is reading a book called Fifty Shades of Brown after the results of the Supreme Court’s decision on Arizona immigration laws. The Statue of Liberty's is a reference to the popular novel Fifty Shades of Grey.
Tone of the cartoon:
1) Positive framing of undocumented
immigrants
2) Negative framing of
immigration policies
What “reality” is
constructed/framed about immigration/immigrants?
Arizona’s controversial
immigration laws were mostly neutralized by the Supreme Court, but the law that
requires proper documentation at any given moment is still legal. The shades of brown
refers to the view that police officers are still able to confront
someone that may possibly be an illegal immigrant by judging them on the color, or "shade", of their skin. This element of the Arizona law is being depicted as incredibly subjective and racist.
Tone of the cartoon:
Team Member Name: Stefani Lewis
Publication: U-T San Diego
Date: April 26, 2012
Cartoonist: Steve Breen (U.S.)
Title of the cartoon: N/A
Cartoon #: N/A
What action is taking place in the cartoon? What is the context?
The action shows Arizona pointing a finger at the white house, saying, "you lost." The White House in return is pointing a finger (assumed to be President Obama's) at Arizona saying, "you lost." Two Hispanic immigrants are shown being confused ("I'm lost...") because they are unsure what their future is, which is dependent upon the immigration policies being argued over by the White House and Arizona.
Tone of the cartoon:
1) Positive framing of undocumented immigrants
2) Negative framing of immigration policies
What “reality” is constructed/framed about immigration/immigrants?
The reality shows that while Arizona and President Obama argue about the immigration reform, the undocumented workers are in an uncomfortable position, caught in the middle of the debate, kept in a sort of limbo until a decision is made. While nothing remains decided by the White House and Supreme Court, the undocumented populace are also kept in indecision. Ultimately, our immigrant population are real people who just want to live normal lives, but they are the real losers when immigration reform is argued endlessly.
Team Member Name: Stefani Lewis
Publication: Arizona Republic/US News
Team Member Name: Alex Jeppesen
Publication: N/A
Date: March 2011
Cartoonist: Dave Granlund (U.S.)
Date: March 2011
Cartoonist: Dave Granlund (U.S.)
Title of the cartoon: N/A
Cartoon #: N/A
Cartoon #: N/A
What action is taking place in
the cartoon? What is the context?
A U.S Supreme Court judge is walking along the fence that lies between Arizona and Mexico. A piece of paper off to the side reads, “yes and no.”
A U.S Supreme Court judge is walking along the fence that lies between Arizona and Mexico. A piece of paper off to the side reads, “yes and no.”
Tone of the cartoon:
1) positive framing of undocumented
immigrants
2) negative framing of
immigration policies
What “reality” is
constructed/framed about immigration/immigrants?
The Supreme Court is walking along the fence that represents the Arizona immigration laws. The Supreme Court is symbolically divided on the SB1070 issue because the court did not throw out
the state provision requiring police to check the immigration status of someone
they suspect is in the United States without documentation. The "yes and no" document is referring to the Supreme Courts decision to vote down most laws but still keep the most controversial one. The decision would be prohibiting police officers from
arresting people on minor immigration charges, but still have the ability to question people due through racial profiling. The cartoon is suggesting that the Supreme Court needs to take a definitive side on SB1070 and not balance between both sides.
Team Member Name: Stefani Lewis
Publication: U-T San Diego
Date: April 26, 2012
Cartoonist: Steve Breen (U.S.)
Title of the cartoon: N/A
Cartoon #: N/A
What action is taking place in the cartoon? What is the context?
The action shows Arizona pointing a finger at the white house, saying, "you lost." The White House in return is pointing a finger (assumed to be President Obama's) at Arizona saying, "you lost." Two Hispanic immigrants are shown being confused ("I'm lost...") because they are unsure what their future is, which is dependent upon the immigration policies being argued over by the White House and Arizona.
Tone of the cartoon:
1) Positive framing of undocumented immigrants
2) Negative framing of immigration policies
What “reality” is constructed/framed about immigration/immigrants?
The reality shows that while Arizona and President Obama argue about the immigration reform, the undocumented workers are in an uncomfortable position, caught in the middle of the debate, kept in a sort of limbo until a decision is made. While nothing remains decided by the White House and Supreme Court, the undocumented populace are also kept in indecision. Ultimately, our immigrant population are real people who just want to live normal lives, but they are the real losers when immigration reform is argued endlessly.
Team Member Name: Stefani Lewis
Publication: Arizona Republic/US News
Date: April 25, 2012
Cartoonist: Steve Benson (U.S.)
Title of the cartoon: Clown Politics
Cartoon #: N/A
What action is taking place in the cartoon? What is the context?
The action is former Republican Arizona senator dressed as a clown, saying that SB 1070 forbids the racial profiling, or in other words, "judging a person by how they look".
Tone of the cartoon:
1) Negative framing of undocumented immigrants
2) Negative framing of immigration policies
What “reality” is constructed/framed about immigration/immigrants?
Russell Pearce is a former Republican Arizona senator, and an architect of the SB 1070. SB 1070 was a controversial act passed in Arizona, that was recognized as the strictest against illegal immigration in the U.S. It was called “Support our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhood Act”. SB 1070 says if someone is stopped by an officer, that officer has reason to believe that person is in the country illegally, further action can be taken. The act prohibits against racial profiling, but the cartoon points out how, regardless of how moral it is, it is inherently impossible to judge someone as possibly being illegal without racially profiling them. The reality constructed by the cartoon is critical of the SB 1070, perhaps making a statement on the "clownishness" of the provision.
http://www.politicalcartoons.com/cartoon/7e6c1241-97cd-4799-aaeb-7d1a84e50b0a.html
Team Member Name: Seth Merrill
Publication: Pittsburgh Tribune-Review
Date: June 27th, 2012
Cartoonist: Randy Bish (U.S.)
Title of the cartoon: Supreme Court Immigration
Cartoon #: 114184
What action is taking place in the cartoon? What is the context? The gun is depicting Arizona's immigration law enforcement. It says the the Federal Government trigger (the ability to actually carry out the law), is "sold separately."
Tone of the cartoon:
1) Positive framing of undocumented immigrant
2) Negative framing of immigration policies
What “reality” is constructed/framed about immigration/immigrants? First, the fact that a gun is used shows that the cartoonist view Arizona immigration law and harmful and damaging, if enforced. He is showing that Arizona essentially has their hands tied behind their back when it comes to enforcing the law, as the Supreme Court decision mandated what aspects of the law were unconstitutional and which ones were enforceable. He could also be making a statement that by allowing the "racial profiling" provision to remain on the law, the government is essentially enabling Arizona in enforcing a potentially hurtful law.
Team Member Name: Seth Merrill
Publication: St. Louis Post-Dispatch
Date: June 25th, 2012
Cartoonist: RJ Matson
Title of the cartoon: US Immigration Policy
Cartoon #: 114083
What action is taking place in the cartoon? What is the context?
Cartoonist: Steve Benson (U.S.)
Title of the cartoon: Clown Politics
Cartoon #: N/A
What action is taking place in the cartoon? What is the context?
The action is former Republican Arizona senator dressed as a clown, saying that SB 1070 forbids the racial profiling, or in other words, "judging a person by how they look".
Tone of the cartoon:
1) Negative framing of undocumented immigrants
2) Negative framing of immigration policies
What “reality” is constructed/framed about immigration/immigrants?
Russell Pearce is a former Republican Arizona senator, and an architect of the SB 1070. SB 1070 was a controversial act passed in Arizona, that was recognized as the strictest against illegal immigration in the U.S. It was called “Support our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhood Act”. SB 1070 says if someone is stopped by an officer, that officer has reason to believe that person is in the country illegally, further action can be taken. The act prohibits against racial profiling, but the cartoon points out how, regardless of how moral it is, it is inherently impossible to judge someone as possibly being illegal without racially profiling them. The reality constructed by the cartoon is critical of the SB 1070, perhaps making a statement on the "clownishness" of the provision.
http://www.politicalcartoons.com/cartoon/7e6c1241-97cd-4799-aaeb-7d1a84e50b0a.html
Team Member Name: Seth Merrill
Publication: Pittsburgh Tribune-Review
Date: June 27th, 2012
Cartoonist: Randy Bish (U.S.)
Title of the cartoon: Supreme Court Immigration
Cartoon #: 114184
What action is taking place in the cartoon? What is the context? The gun is depicting Arizona's immigration law enforcement. It says the the Federal Government trigger (the ability to actually carry out the law), is "sold separately."
Tone of the cartoon:
1) Positive framing of undocumented immigrant
2) Negative framing of immigration policies
What “reality” is constructed/framed about immigration/immigrants? First, the fact that a gun is used shows that the cartoonist view Arizona immigration law and harmful and damaging, if enforced. He is showing that Arizona essentially has their hands tied behind their back when it comes to enforcing the law, as the Supreme Court decision mandated what aspects of the law were unconstitutional and which ones were enforceable. He could also be making a statement that by allowing the "racial profiling" provision to remain on the law, the government is essentially enabling Arizona in enforcing a potentially hurtful law.
Team Member Name: Seth Merrill
Publication: St. Louis Post-Dispatch
Date: June 25th, 2012
Cartoonist: RJ Matson
Title of the cartoon: US Immigration Policy
Cartoon #: 114083
What action is taking place in the cartoon? What is the context?
The Statue of Liberty (which represents the Supreme Court) is kicking a statue of Arizona governor Jan Brewer off her monument. Brewer is depicted as barbaric, holding a club and having barbed wire on her crown.
Tone of the cartoon:
1) Positive framing of undocumented immigrant
2) Positve framing of immigration policies
What “reality” is constructed/framed about immigration/immigrants?
The cartoon praises the Supreme Court's decision to strike down much of SB1070. It also negatively frames Jan Brewer as hateful towards immigrants and heavily law enforcement/deportation minded. It may also being making a statement, whether it be a good or a bad thing, about the Supreme Court stepping in and deciding the fate of Arizona's immigration law.
Tone of the cartoon:
1) Positive framing of undocumented immigrant
2) Positve framing of immigration policies
What “reality” is constructed/framed about immigration/immigrants?
The cartoon praises the Supreme Court's decision to strike down much of SB1070. It also negatively frames Jan Brewer as hateful towards immigrants and heavily law enforcement/deportation minded. It may also being making a statement, whether it be a good or a bad thing, about the Supreme Court stepping in and deciding the fate of Arizona's immigration law.
No comments:
Post a Comment