New Report Examines the Hardships of Life After Solitary Confinement

August 10, 2012 Solitary Watch

by Jean Casella and James Ridgeway

 

An important new report, released yesterday by the American Friends Service Committee in Arizona, is the first to focus on the effects solitary confinement has on its survivors afterthey leave prison. Lifetime in Lockdown: How Isolation Conditions Impact Prisoner Reentry, finds that spending time in solitary leaves people “deeply traumatized and essentially socially disabled.” These “crippling symptoms” combine with “the extensive legal and structural barriers to successful reentry” to create “recipe for failure.” It is hardly surprising, then, that the report is able to “directly link conditions in Arizona’s supermax prisons with the state’s high recidivism rate.”

Lifetimes in Lockdown raises issues that have been largely absent from research and discussions on prisoner reentry and recidivism. As the report points out:

Much of the discourse…has focused on what are referred to as ‘collateral consequences’: the structural barriers erected by institutions that bar people with criminal convictions from voting, housing, employment, welfare assistance, and other factors critical to ensuring success upon release. Rarely is there discussion of the direct impact that prison conditions have on a person’s cognitive, emotional, social, and behavioral functioning and therefore, on that person’s ability to function as a member of society post-incarceration.

The most serious problems, of course, result from the ”deleterious mental health impacts of incarceration in super maximum-security—or “supermax”—environments,” which remain with people long after they leave solitary for the general population, or leave prison for the free world. In addition, the report finds, “policies limiting visitation and prohibiting maximum-security prisoners from participation in education, treatment, and employment have a negative impact on these prisoners’ reentry prospects.”

Yet the Arizona Department of Corrections, like most prison systems, does little to “prepare prisoners who have been held in supermax during their incarceration for reentry to the community,” and on the outside, “social service agencies are largely unaware of, and unprepared to address, the special needs of this population.” Many survivors of solitary “‘slip through the cracks,’ while others self-isolate and deliberately avoid social service agencies.”


The report is based largely on research done by Dr. Brackette F. Williams, Associate Professor of Anthropology at the University of Arizona, under a Soros Justice Fellowship. Under the name “Project Homecoming,” Brackette worked with the AFSC in Arizona to study the impact of solitary confinement on prisoner reetry. As the report notes:

Psychologist Dr. Terry Kupers makes the comparison between prisoners who have just been released from solitary confinement in a supermax facility and persons who were recently on suicide watch. The most likely and dangerous time for violence, acting out, or another crisis to occur is immediately after one is released. Dr. Kupers says, “Whether a prisoner leaves the isolation unit and gets into trouble on the yard or ‘maxes out…’ and gets into trouble in the community, we are seeing a new population of prisoners who, on account of lengthy stints in isolation units, are not well prepared to return to a social milieu.” This is an institutional and systemic problem that is created by the conditions of incarceration…

The participants reported that they would often avoid the areas where the few available social service agencies, transitional homes, and homeless shelters are located, because these are areas where they made poor choices previously. Likewise, available shelters offer very little in the way of privacy, are always crowded, and difficult to get into. For prisoners who have spent years in isolation, such an environment would be the last place they would want to turn. While deciding to avoid problem locations would usually be considered wise, the reality is complex–in these cases, it renders the individuals even more isolated and lacking any support networks or services. Here, the self-inflicted social isolation that was created by the extreme isolation in prison is most noticeably debilitating.

In describing his life on the outside, one participant who avoided old neighborhoods and contacts said that “life is way harder out here for me than it is in there.” He is not alone in this nostalgia for prison life and for the isolation of the supermax cell. A female participant, also homeless and barely getting by at the time of the interview, said almost ashamedly, “The worst thing that I can honestly say about trying to get back into society is I miss my cage more and more everyday. I just can’t function out here.” When asked, “Do you want to the small cage back or the big cage?” she replied, “The smaller the better. I can control everything in it.” They make repeated efforts to avoid people, for example moving to the edge of the city or living alone in a tunnel. It is strikingly reminiscent of the social withdrawal that Craig Haney describes as endemic to persons held in isolation for long periods, except now they are outside the supermax cell, in the great wide open of supposed freedom, which terrifies them.

Thoughts of suicide permeated many of the participants’ interviews, especially when the conversation turned toward plans for the future. At least 10 of the male participants (50 percent) from Pima County had considered suicide between their release from prison and their first interview. Each participant who reported suicidal thoughts mentioned them in more than one of their interviews. Strikingly, some of these men had been out of prison less than one week when the first interview took place. They reported the inability to see a viable way to remain out of prison, yet at the same time could not imagine doing more prison time. By their final interview, three of these men stated that they considered suicide on a daily basis, but had yet to act on these considerations. A few also considered committing some crime that would land them back in prison and allow for more time to devise a better strategy for handling life on the outside.

Anyone leaving prison is faced with an unwelcoming social landscape. The simultaneous necessity and absence of housing and work are experienced immediately. The freedom of release is truncated by limited housing options, partially as a result of neighborhood bans on people with felony convictions, and a job market that has very little inclination or incentive to hire former prisoners. Add to this reality significantly higher rates of mental illness; tendencies toward social withdrawal; lack of support networks or family to rely on due to the added social distance of a supermax prison; and no transition services after spending years in the most extreme isolation, and the experience of a former supermax prisoner begins to take shape. More notably it begins to demonstrate the compounded effects of supermax confinement and the additional limitations once released. In the same way, one prisoner’s perceived ease of life in prison compared to his experiences of life on the outside, as well as another’s longing for a space she can control even if it is a cage, demonstrates precisely the extra layer of difficulties created by prolonged isolation.

A press release from AFSC calls the report’s findings ”a wake-up call to corrections officials, state leaders, and social service agencies, who are often completely unaware of the prison experiences of their clients or how to assist them in this transition. AFSC hopes that this research will add to the growing body of evidence that the practice of long-term solitary confinement in supermax units creates more problems than it is purported to solve and should be abolished.”

AFSC also notes that “the release of this report coincides with the launch of Arizona is Maxed Out, a joint campaign with the ACLU of Arizona against the planned expansion of maximum-security prisons in Arizona. The latest state budget allocated $50 million to build 500 more maximum-security beds in the next two years.”

“Cruel Isolation”: Amnesty International Report Blasts Conditions in Arizona’s Prisons

April 3, 2012 Solitary Watch

by Jean Casella and James Ridgeway

A report just released by Amnesty International documents and denounces conditons in Arizona’s state prisons, including their gross overuse of long-term solitary confinement. A cogent summary of the report’s findings appears this morning in the Arizona Republic, in an article by Bob Ortega (who has written before about Arizona’s brutal prisons and jails):

Arizona’s state prisons overuse solitary confinement in cruel, inhumane and illegal ways, particularly for mentally ill prisoners and juveniles as young as 14, the human-rights group Amnesty International charges in a report to be released today.

According to the report, which is to be delivered to the governor and state lawmakers, Arizona prisons use solitary confinement as a punishment more than most other states or the federal government.

The group found that some inmates are held in isolation for months and sometimes years, and it called on the state to use the practice only as a last resort and only for a short duration.

In addition, it asked that the practice not be used against children or people who are mentally ill or have behavioral disabilities. The group also called on state officials to improve conditions for prisoners in solitary confinement and to act to reduce the high number of suicides in Arizona’s prisons.

Arizona Department of Corrections officials said they had not read the report Monday and were unable to comment.

According to the DOC, 3,130 inmates, or 8 percent of the state prison population, were being held in the highest-security, maximum-custody units as of Friday, and most were confined alone.

Although maximum-security inmates include those who are violent and may represent a threat to other inmates or staff, Amnesty noted that Arizona’s own figures show that 35 percent of inmates in maximum security were committed for non-violent crimes.

Amnesty International’s report cited sources who said prisoners are regularly assigned to maximum security for relatively minor rule violations or disruptive behavior, often because they have mental-health or behavioral problems.

The report noted cases of Arizona inmates who have been in solitary confinement continuously for 15 years. Amnesty said that various international human-rights treaties and experts, including the United Nations’ Special Rapporteur on Torture, have called on states to limit the use of solitary confinement to exceptional circumstances, for short periods and to prohibit solitary confinement of children 17 and younger.

Amnesty’s report found that 14 children 14 to 17 years old had been held in maximum custody at the Rincon unit in the Tucson state prison, under conditions similar to those of adults: 22 to 24 hours a day in their cells, limited exercise alone in a small cage and with no recreational activities.

Because children and adolescents are not fully developed physically and emotionally, they are less equipped to tolerate the effects of isolation, according to studies cited in the report.

Some charges in the Amnesty report echo those raised in a federal lawsuit filed by the Americal Civil Liberties Union and the Prison Law Office last month, alleging that Arizona’s Department of Corrections doesn’t provide adequate mental-health and medical care.

The state has not responded to that suit, and the Corrections spokesman said the department wouldn’t respond to any parts of the Amnesty report that related to that litigation.

Last July, Corrections officials declined to meet with Amnesty representatives from London who were visiting Arizona, nor allow them to visit the Eyman state prison, which houses about 1,950 maximum-security inmates.

A spokesman said Corrections Director Charles Ryan had other commitments. In a letter to Amnesty, Ryan cited security concerns in declining their visit request. On that same tour, Texas and California correctional officials met with Amnesty’s representatives, and California permitted them to visit maximum-custody units…

Most Arizona maximum-security inmates are isolated in “special management units,” windowless cells that, contrary to the U.N. Standard Minimum Rules for Treatment of Prisoners, have no direct access to sunlight or fresh air, and have lighting that is dimmed at night but left on 24 hours a day, the Amnesty report said.

Inmates in SMU units are not allowed to work. They typically receive two daily meals in their cells, have no contact with other inmates and are allowed out of their cell no more than three times a week for two hours for exercise and showers, in many cases in a windowless room with nothing except tall walls and a mesh over the roof.

Amnesty cited allegations that the cells are no longer steam-cleaned between inmates, so that food, urine and feces are stuck on the walls and food slots.

Both Amnesty International and inmates contacted by The Arizona Republic expressed concern that the conditions in solitary may contribute to Arizona’s high prison suicide rate, which was double the national average last fiscal year. Seven of the 10 most recent suicides in state prisons were by inmates being held in solitary in maximum-security cells, according to Corrections death reports…

While many states, including California, New York, Massachusetts, Vermont, Ohio, Mississippi and Wisconsin, bar placing seriously mentally ill inmates in solitary because the social isolation and sensory deprivation can lead to further psychological deterioration, Arizona does not.

Amnesty cited reports that serious mental illnesses often go undiagnosed in Arizona prisons because of a lack of mental-health staff and inadequate screening and monitoring.

Amnesty reported that mental-health staff don’t have weekly rounds, visiting maximum-security inmates only when there’s a crisis, and consulting with them at their cell door.

It noted the ACLU lawsuit, which alleges that prisoners in solitary wait an average of six to eight months to see a psychologist, with some waiting more than a year. One prisoner diagnosed with serious mental illness spent two years in solitary without seeing a psychiatrist despite repeated requests and referrals by staff, according to the suit.

Amnesty noted 43 suicides listed by Corrections from October 2005 to April 2011 and said that of the 37 cases in which it was able to collect information, 22 — or 60 percent — took place in maximum-custody solitary units. There have been at least eight more suicides since April 2011 and 16 other deaths that the department described only as “under investigation.”

In letters to The Republic, inmates have raised concerns similar to those in the Amnesty report. “While on suicide watch here at SMU-1, the lights stay on all night and make it impossible to sleep — all day, all night,” wrote Dustin Brislan, an inmate with a serious mental illness in solitary confinement at Eyman.

“Lack of contact, of seeing the outside, seeing any bit of sunlight, smelling fresh air, all of that has increased my mental illness. I’m only allowed recreation every other day, where I’m put in a windowless cell off area.”

The Eyman prison is the only one in Arizona not accredited by the National Commission on Correctional Health Care, which requires that prisoners being held in solitary confinement have at least weekly contact with mental-health staff…

The Amnesty report also questioned why Arizona’s Corrections Department requires all prisoners sentenced to life to spend at least their first two years in solitary confinement, regardless of whether they pose a threat to other inmates or guards.

“There appears to be no valid reason,” the report said. American Bar Association standards call for prisoners to be kept in solitary more than a year only if the prisoner poses a “continuing, serious threat.”…

Amnesty International said Arizona should:

Reduce the number of prisoners in isolation to only those who are a serious and continuing threat.

Improve overall conditions, provide more out-of-cell time, better exercise facilities, meaningful education and rehabilitation programs.

Introduce measures to allow some group interactions and association to benefit inmates’ mental health and provide incentives for better behavior.

Remove all serious mentally ill prisoners from solitary and prohibit them from being placed in solitary.

Improve mental-health monitoring; take steps to reduce suicide, including more humane conditions in suicide watch cells; and prohibit solitary confinement of prisoners under 18.

Lawsuit Charges Solitary Confinement in Arizona’s Prisons Is Cruel and Unusual Punishment

March 6, 2012 Solitary Watch by Jean Casella and James Ridgeway

A federal class-action lawsuit filed today by a legal team led by the American Civil Liberties Union and the Prison Law Office is noteworthy on several fronts. It documents the torturous conditions in Arizona’s supermax prisons and other lockdown units. And it combines a challenge to solitary confinement with claims of “grossly inadequate” medical and mental health care, arguing that both violate the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution by subjecting Arizona’s state prisoners to cruel and unusual punishment.

According to a press release from the ACLU:

The lawsuit…charges that thousands of prisoners are routinely subjected to solitary confinement in windowless cells behind solid steel doors, in conditions of extreme social isolation and sensory deprivation, leading to serious physical and psychological harm. Some prisoners in solitary receive no outdoor exercise for months or years on end, and some receive only two meals a day.

“The prison conditions in Arizona are among the worst I’ve ever seen,” said Donald Specter, executive director of the Berkeley, Calif.-based Prison Law Office. “Prisoners have a constitutional right to receive adequate health care, and it is unconscionable for them to be left to suffer and die in the face of neglect and deliberate indifference.”

Specter was the lead counsel in Brown v. Plata, a similar case from California in which the Supreme Court last year reaffirmed that prisoners have a constitutional right to adequate health care.

“Courts have consistently ruled that solitary confinement of people with mental illness is unconstitutional because it aggravates their illness and prevents them from getting proper treatment,” said David Fathi, director of the ACLU National Prison Project. “Even for those with no prior history of mental illness, solitary confinement can inflict extraordinary suffering and lead to catastrophic psychiatric deterioration.”

Critically ill prisoners have begged prison officials for medical treatment, according to the lawsuit, only to be told to “be patient,” that “it’s all in your head,” or that they should “pray” to be cured. Arizona prison officials have repeatedly been warned by their own medical staff of the inadequacy of the care, echoing complaints from prisoner advocates and families that prisoners face a substantial risk of serious harm and death. Yet, they have failed to ensure that minimally adequate health care is provided as required by the Constitution…

Jackie Thomas, one of the lawsuit’s named plaintiffs who is housed in solitary confinement at the state prison complex in Eyman, has suffered significant deterioration in his physical and mental health as a result of being held in isolation, where he has become suicidal and repeatedly harmed himself in other ways. Prison staff have failed to treat his mental illness, improperly starting and stopping psychotropic medications and repeatedly using ineffective medications that carry severe side effects. Last November, Thomas overdosed on medication but did not receive any medical care.

“Faced with such gross indifference on the part of prison officials to the needs of prisoners with mental illness in their care, it was essential we get involved,” said Jennifer Alewelt, staff attorney with the Arizona Center for Disability Law, one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit. “Prisoners with mental illness can be particularly vulnerable, and we must do everything we can to ensure their mental health needs are met while incarcerated.”

Filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona against Charles Ryan, director of the Arizona Department of Corrections, and Richard Pratt, the department’s interim director of the division of health services, the lawsuit asks, among other things, that constitutionally adequate health care be made available to prisoners, that medications be distributed to patients in a timely manner, and that prisoners not be held in isolation in conditions of social isolation and sensory deprivation that put them at risk of harm. The lawsuit does not seek monetary damages.

“Arizona has used the absence of transparency to callously ignore the basic needs of persons entrusted to its care, at times with deadly results,” said Daniel Pochoda, legal director of the ACLU of Arizona. “Absent court intervention the health and well-being of thousands of prisoners will continue to be sacrificed to economic expediency.”

A copy of the lawsuit is available here and here.

For a comprehensive look at solitary confinement in Arizona, see the American Friends Service Committee’s 2007 report Buried Alive.

17 Arrested on Final Day of ALEC Summit, SRP Lockdown and First Friday Demo

From AZ Resist ALEC

Dec. 4, 2011 Anarchist News

“It’s a black bloc blur but I’m pretty sure it ruled… damn. Last Friday
night...”
On Friday, December 2nd, the final day of mobilization against the summit
of the American Legislative Exchange Council, 16 were arrested at an
action against Salt River Project. The action was led by DinĂ© and O’odham
elders and had multiple stages of escalation.

Salt River Project is on the Corporate Board of ALEC, Louise Benally, a
resident of Black Mesa impacted by SRP’s operations, delivered a letter to
SRP that outlines critical concerns of her community. She expressed that
“My community is heavily impacted by Salt River Project’s coal and water
extraction activities. SRP has extensive ties to Peabody Energy’s massive
mining operations and the Navajo Generating Station which they co-own.
Coal mining has destroyed thousands of archeological sites and our only
water source has been seriously compromised. Their operations are causing
widespread respiratory problems, lung diseases, and other health impacts
on humans, the environment, and all living things.”

Five people locked down in the lobby and numerous others blockaded the
front entrance. Banners inside and outside read “Expose ALEC, Peabody
Kills”, “UnOccupy Our Lands” and “Shut ALEC Down, Relocation = Genocide”
in specific reference to the past forty years of forced relocation of Diné
people from Black Mesa. The police presence started out small and
increased to a massive collaborated effort between the Police Departments
of Tempe, Scottsdale, and Phoenix, including riot police and a bomb squad.
Streets on both ends were shut down and business was disrupted for
multiple buildings. Riot police snatched multiple individuals in the
crowd, who continued to chat, dance, etc. The numbers started out at
around 70 and continued to swell as others found out about it. The whole
action lasted 6 hours.

More information on the SRP action here:
http://azresistsalec.wordpress.com/2011/12/02/breaking-news-indigenous-e...

As the day continued the undercover police presence was particularly
pervasive and obvious. Many people were monitored and followed throughout
the day culminating in the presence of more than a dozen known undercovers
after a police attack on the first Friday demo.

First Friday Demo

A call was put out for people to converge at a particular intersection in
downtown Phoenix during the monthly art walk and to take the street. Many
arrived in bloc with a ‘Class War!’ banner for a roving dance party
following a radical marching band. The police responded heavily about
twenty minutes in and pepper spray started to fly. Scuffles erupted as the
police tried to snatch people, and ultimately the pigs were only able to
take one person away.

From the AZ Resists ALEC call for legal support:
“Branson was snatched from the crowd of protesters during the initial
pepper spray of the crowd, and placed under arrest. Branson was then
brutalized by police who left him with cuts on his body and abrasions on
his face. The police also pepper sprayed Branson once he was cuffed and in
the back of the police car, completely unable to defend himself. The
unwarranted pepper spraying left him with chemical burns on the areas of
his body that had open sores from the brutal arrest. Branson is being
charged with 2 counts of aggravated assault on an officer. His bond is
$2800.”

Some portions of the crowd continued on as others scattered, some of whom
were followed by police. At this point, the presence of undercovers in
various spaces in downtown increased dramatically, though fortunately, no
further arrests were made.

Jail Support

During the three days of the ALEC summit, a total of 25 people were
arrested, two of whom face serious felony charges. All are now out of
jail. This comes two weeks after the state re-arrested one person on
felony charges from last year’s anti-nazi actions in Phoenix. During that
re-arrest, Phoenix Police photographed others present and interrogated
them as to whether they were anarchists. Long term support is needed for
all those under attack by the state in Arizona – indigenous people,
undocumented people, all people of color, trans and queer people, poor and
working class people and anarchists.

To support those arrested during the ALEC mobilization, see the Legal Aid
page from AZ Resists ALEC here:
http://azresistsalec.wordpress.com/legal-aid/

Photos from SRP action:
http://farm8.static.flickr.com/7148/6443196071_8cb86cecf3_b.jpg
http://farm8.static.flickr.com/7165/6444250383_c65c5edf62_b.jpg
http://farm8.static.flickr.com/7025/6443194635_dedb6e5437_b.jpg
http://farm8.static.flickr.com/7174/6443191609_3faa0da6bc_b.jpg
http://farm8.static.flickr.com/7153/6443197401_4026bfd981_b.jpg

Video of pepper spray at First Friday demo:
http://www.youtube.com/shutdownalec#p/a/u/1/5f9vi3TDyek


-------------------------
www.blackmesais.org
www.azresistsalec.wordpress.com
www.chaparralrespectsnoborders.wordpress.com
www.firesneverextinguished.wordpress.com
www.shutdownalec.org
(A)

Anarchists initiate immigrant solidarity march to commemorate the deaths of three youths

Sunday, January 23, 2011 firesneverextinguished.blogspot.com

Phoenix area anarchists kicked off the new year by calling for a march in
the arts district of downtown Phoenix for the monthly "First Friday"
artwalk. The call was in response to the deaths of two immigrant youths
who were found in a canal after fleeing from a Maricopa County Sheriff
Deputy near Gila Bend, and the murder of a third youth who was shot and
killed by a Border Patrol agent while climbing the border wall in Nogales.
Nearly two dozen anarchists, anti-authoritarians, and O'odham and Dine'
indigenous comrades, all assembled for this unpermitted manifestation of
outrage. This also being a First Friday (FF) our small group attracted the
attention and participation of many in the crowds wandering between
galleries and bars, as well as from the youth who often come down to FF to
get out of the house, check out some art, and to flirt and meet other kids
hanging out.

The march took to the streets with banners and statements against the
"poliMigra," prisons, all borders and police. We shouted into the night
"Out of the galleries, into the streets!" Naturally we garnered the
attention of the police, not a special distinction as on any given FF they
maintain a very heavy presence, even though a demonstration like this has
probably not occurred in sometime, aside from an organic confrontation
with the authorities a couple years back. After a few shoving matches with
the Phoenix cops, the march was pushed to the sidewalks, but after losing
the police, the march returned to moving in and out of the streets,
throwing traffic barricades into street, and making a detour into one of
the more notoriously yuppie galleries downtown. We lost some of our
numbers when we marched down to the Suns game, but we also shook our
police tail and were able to march in the streets unimpeded (aside from
the occasional police vehicle that would pull up, use their bullhorn to
tell people to get off the streets, and then drive off). We encountered
the most reactionary and nationalistic sentiment of the night outside the
Suns game, but we shook it off and mobbed onto a light rail train for a
free ride back to the arts district.

So, what does this mean for the future? The mainstream movement voices
were once again silent during this latest outrage, the "human rights
movement" raised a number of eye brows around town after their total
absence in any forum when young Danny Rodriguez was murdered by Phoenix
cop Richard Chrisman in his mother's trailer last October. The high
profile killing of this young man came amid a shit storm of corruption and
brutality allegations against the Phoenix police department, specifically
the notorious South Mountain precinct, but perhaps the mainstream hacks
were too concerned about upsetting their friends in the mayor's office to
actually hold one consistent political position. Or maybe someone should
have told them there's money to be made from the non-profit industrial
complex in organizing against police violence, that seems to get their
attention.

What I saw in the streets the night of this march is a sight becoming
increasingly common in Phoenix, a gathering of indigenous, latin@, and
anarchist people ready to take to the streets and to move beyond the
boundaries put forth by the mainstream immigrant movement's leadership, as
well as the laws of the authorities. I believe that in these alliances lay
the future for a broad based movement of resistance, built upon mutual
respect and participation in confronting this system of death, repression,
and incarceration until there is total freedom for all.

Below is the text of the flier handed out during the solidarity march,
along with a couple more images from this procession.


  Where are the voices of disbelief and anger now that SB1070 is law?
Where have the crowds gone who were in the streets in the spring and
summer? This writing is addressed to you who weep with clenched fists
when another immigrant is found dead trekking across the desert, shot
dead by a border patrol agent, or drowned in a canal after fleeing the
authorities. This is to you, who tires of a political movement that
demands your patience for a political solution all the while this
O'odham (the indigenous people of this region) land is militarized by
the border patrol, building more new checkpoints, and nothing ever
gets better.

  Why now, why without the responsible, reasonable movement leadership?
Because it’s come to this: Three children, presumed immigrants by the
state, found dead in a canal on Christmas eve, just one week before
that five other immigrant brothers and sisters were discovered by the
authorities, forced to conceal themselves in cow manure. Just
yesterday a 17 year old Nogales resident was shot dead by a border
guard on the U.S. side after climbing the border fence. Where is the
outcry from the human rights activists, or even the mainstream
immigrant groups?

  http://www.azcentral.com/community/pinal/articles/2010/12/16/20101216pinal-county-arrests-abrk.html

  http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/2010/12/24/20101224canal1224.html

  http://www.nogalesinternational.com/articles/2011/01/07/news/doc4d272fc9733a6461195366.txt

  This is a call to all those who oppose the tyranny of law and order,
this cold business of institutions that place freedom and dignity
underfoot to preserve power and control for the few. There will be
people in the streets tonight, decrying this sick order that places
property, law, and the will of a few over the lives, dreams, and
freedom of human beings.

  Another night of wandering the sidewalks of downtown admiring the art
that lampoons Arpaio, or defends immigrants, and then home, content to
believe that a moral duty has been exercised, justice against the
oppressors has been served in Phoenix this First Friday. Of course we
appreciate this art, but to pretend that the representation of a
struggle is in fact a struggle is lunacy!
  
  There is active solidarity, or there is complacency! Observers of art,
become participants in your own life! Join us tonight as we take the
streets to stand with all those murdered by the laws and institutions
on this stolen indigenous land.