Habeas Corpus After 9/11 wins 2012 ABA Gavel Award Honorable Mention

NYU Press is proud to announce that Jonathan Hafetz’s book, Habeas Corpus After 9/11: Confronting America’s New Global Detention System, has been chosen to receive Honorable Mention in this year’s 2012 American Bar Association Silver Gavel Awards.

The Silver Gavel Award is the ABA’s highest honor in recognition of outstanding work that fosters the American public’s understanding of law and the legal system. This is the second book from NYU Press in two years to receive top honors in the ABA Silver Gavel Awards – in 2010, Snitching: Criminal Informants and the Erosion of American Justice, by Alexandra Natapoff, also won an Honorable Mention.

Read more about the award at the ABA’s website.

Cory Booker: Heroic? Yes. Magic? No

The mayor’s quick action helped save a woman’s life. He’ll need more time to rescue Newark.
By Andra Gillespie (This article originally appeared on theroot.com.)

When Cory Booker recently raced into a burning home to help save the life of a neighbor, his act of bravery turned the Newark, New Jersey, mayor into one of the lead stories of the day. News outlets from CNN to Fox News covered Booker’s heroism.

Not to be outdone, fans on Twitter conjured up #corybookerstories to reveal even more amazing feats from the mayor. Overnight, Booker’s courage transformed him from a widely admired mayor into something of a superhero.

While the feel-good stories and tweets were certainly uplifting, it is important to consider the long-term implications of the coverage of this episode. Black elected officials like Booker face a “hero paradox” when they are perceived as living legends.

As part of my research for a new book, The New Black Politician: Cory Booker, Newark, and Post-Racial America, I found that a new generation of black leaders regularly find themselves lionized, especially in contrast with the older black politicians they replace. The support that these young politicians experience is earnest and well-meaning, but it often triggers latent, class-based resentments among constituents and creates unrealistic expectations that threaten to undermine their ability to serve effectively.

When Booker was elected mayor of Newark in 2006, he took on one of the toughest jobs in America. Newark is a city that has long faced challenges. Even before the city experienced devastating riots in 1967, deindustrialization was taking jobs and residents out of the city.

Andra Gillespie is associate professor of political science at Emory University and author of The New Black Politician: Cory Booker, Newark, and Post-Racial America.
Read the full story at theroot.com.

Eating, Laid Bare

by Kyla Tompkins

So, people have been sending me the link to the premier article on the ‘racist cake’ spectacle, asking me what I think of the most recent eruption of a trope that I have been talking about for years, of the black body fantasized as edible. (You can find the article I published in the Eating Callaloo anniversary issue in 2007 here; my book, Racial Indigestion, will discuss this image, as it manifests in the 19th century, at length. Below are a couple of images from the book, forthcoming from NYU Press.)

But hey, all you need is one drop, as it were, of human decency to see why this is wrong. It’s not just the image, it’s the minister’s seeming delight in the image. It’s her penetration of the black figure’s mouth with a silver spoon. It’s the photograph shot from the cake vagina-up, the shock of blackicing cooling on red velvet dainty.  It’s the artist rendition of the woman’s mouth as open, smiling and jaw-broken and therefore always-already assenting to her fate. There are a thousand historical trajectories that “feed” into this, among them centuries of sugar (and now chocolate neo-) plantation slavery that tied sweetness to the laboring bodies that produced the commodity, as the thinnest form of cultural reward. Then too there is the erotic history of eating as a dissident and violent pleasure; the market in Africans that attempted to reduce them to commodities; the fundamentally damaged mode of non-relation that constitutes unquestioned whiteness as an ever-voracious lack and punitive desire for the ‘other’ – now generally understood through the now well-rehearsed but still powerful phrase coined by bell hooks: “Eating the Other.”

Living in North America, reading this image in North America, we need to first honor the pointed re-opening of psychic and affective wounds that this image must have produced.

And yet, it is worth asking, how many lenses mediate this image? A Swedish and Afro-Swedish event that became a U.S. event, more than an event, the kind of event-cascade that only the social media age can produce, there is a lot of momentum riding behind the arrival of an image like this one. Some of the response has been directed at excavating the artist’s intent (best described here); still others have criticized the response as a kind of gustatory pleasure itself, (“Have a Slice of Outrage!”). In general the response has been one of hurt, disgust, a return of historical trauma played out as shock, anger, apology, explanation. So ends another news cycle, affixed on a narrative of blame that is thus endlessly recyclable.

More interesting to me is the admixture of comedy, terror and substitution that has swirled beneath and between the dissemination of the event and its fraught reception, a critical breakdown that could only mean one thing: the West’s deep recognition of these images.  After all, only last year, Penguin Australia’s accidental publication of a cookbook that called for “ground black people” instead of “ground black pepper” actually boosted the cookbook’s sales; and Naomi Campbell (magnificently unfurling her cloak here) threatened to sue Cadbury’s over an ad for Bliss chocolate that said “Move over Naomi, there’s a new diva in town.” Being represented as chocolate was hurtful, Campbell told the press, and she was considering every possible form of redress.

We don’t like to look at these images, but it is worth thinking about what is lost – what forms of political passivity are acceded to – when we turn away. These orificial politics, as awful as they are to look at, lay bare the guts and underbelly of contemporary biopolitics, making visible the rawness of the black subject and citizen’s vulnerability to multiple forms of psychic and bodily damage, and finally, debility. (The last images are, after all, of a radically disabled black woman, cut off at the top of her thighs.)

I cannot speak to the value of the artist, Makode Linde’s, work, but I want to submit that, alongside his putative intention of rendering visible the agony of female circumcision (although the fact that he also considered making a chocolate Naomi Campbell might indicate that the circumcision issue was something of an afterthought), his work ultimately resonated because it redirected the political gaze to the mouth, the one site in the body that it is socially permissible to open in public, and that therefore holds symbolic power as a metaphor for the ways that power cuts into everyday living. Whether or not they intended it, then, Linde and the media forces that detonated the initial scandal around his work, forced us to look down the gorge of alimentary politics.

It was not, in short, the vagina that shocked us, but rather the eating, laughter and – in the videos – screaming that produced the most jarring effects. In the photographs and videos of the cake event, everyone laughs, no one more than the monstrous head of the black cake-woman, whose head is actually the male artist’s in female drag. The underbelly of the joke, Freud tells us, is aggression. Here, comedy sits atop a mountain of political terror, some of it deployed by the artist on the white women who encircle his performance, secure, momentarily, in their non-implication in history. Effaced as ever is the presence of black women, as agents of self-representation, as artists and historical actors, as legible witnesses to their own ongoing survival despite the comedy that adheres to their pain.

In laughter, in agony, while eating or kissing, the mouth – opened at will, wrenched open, slackened, weeping – forces our attention to the wet rawness of the sites where power lays us bare, where the line between the autonomic body and the social world softens to a mucosal wetness. The laugh opens the mouth and bares the body to the other; so does eating. But there are the eaters, and then there are the eaten.

 

Kyla Wazana Tompkins is Associate Professor of English and Gender and Women’s Studies at Pomona College. Her book, Racial Indigestion: Eating Bodies in the 19th Century will be released by NYU Press at the end of July.


Immigrant DREAMs Deferred

By Michael A. Olivas

In his recent Americas Quarterly article, “The Dream Deferred,” fellow NYU Press author Marcelo Suárez-Orozco usefully sketches the demographic developments in the United States that have combined to make Latino children such a substantial public school population. On June 15, the country will celebrate the 30th birthday of the Supreme Court case Plyler v. Doe. This landmark ruling from 1982 has made it possible for undocumented children to enroll in the nation’s public schools, and it has been widely acknowledged as a success story.

When President Reagan and Congress enacted comprehensive immigration reform in 1986, it was possible for many of these children to become citizens. Even early opponents such as James Plyler, the Tyler, Texas superintendent, later indicated that he was happy the case turned out as it did, inasmuch as these children were permitted to stay and get an education.

The case continues to require vigilance because some states still attempt to enact their own laws on the schooling of undocumented children, as Alabama did when it passed a statute requiring registration of its schoolchildren. The legislators just wanted to put the fear of God (and “La Migra” – the immigration authorities) into the hearts of the parents, who were lured to Alabama to do the backbreaking work that others don’t do. The courts enjoined the provisions, although the desired damage had been done: frightened parents removed their children from the schools. In another recent incident, a Texas schoolteacher admonished a child that he should “go back to Mexico.” These kinds of events are newsworthy because they are relatively rare. But the fact is many of the targeted children excel in their academic and personal endeavors and win competitions and awards.

The ongoing debates in the Republican primaries over the DREAM Act — which would provide conditional citizenship to certain undocumented college students — have revealed a great divide on what to do about these children when they reach college age. Recall how Gov. Perry’s immigrant tuition policies, allowing undocumented Texas college students to pay in-state tuition, ran afoul of his opponents in the GOP primary. Herman Cain, in contrast, foolishly advocated for an electrified fence. And Senator Marco Rubio has made several proposals, some of which are semi-DREAM Act, or the DREAM Act in a slumber, which would not give a pathway to eventual permanent residency.

State laws do not wisely address the issues — they violate federal law and overreact. They have also shown the interconnectedness and globalization of migrant and farm labor in a way no other means could have. Only federal comprehensive immigration reform can work — we cannot have 50 state immigration policies, any more than we can have 50 foreign policies or forms of currency. The US Supreme Court recently heard the challenge to the Arizona nativist statute, so restrictionist challenges to federal power are still in play.

In the end, Plyler is an example of our better angels. Re-reading the case today draws attention to the important issues of incorporation of outsiders into our communities, the strains in the U.S. polity, and the unrelenting meanness of the restrictionists who are still fighting this battle more than 30 years later. Most educators are drawn to the story’s narrative arc: innocent children brought to a new country where their families live in the shadows. In our society, then as now, we do not punish our children for the transgressions of their parents. The decision was the best our country has to offer: compassion, a fierce belief in reducing inequality, and political and personal courage. We now need a robust DREAM Act to allow us to keep the benefits of these precious children in our community.

University of Houston law professor Michael A. Olivas is author of No Undocumented Child Left Behind: Plyler v. Doe and the Education of Undocumented Schoolchildren, recently released by New York University Press.