Land of the free and home of the brave - NOT!

My frustrations with the Supreme Court's penchant to use "mootness" (where the controversy has ceased to exist) or "ripeness" (no controversy exists yet) on issues of such national concern are only exacerbated by this display of so called "judicial restraint."

This usurpation of the Supreme Court's duty to interpret the federal constitution and lay out the law of the land is an issue for another day.

The idea of the Official English Amendment in a nation of immigrants, in a state that borders another country seems a bit absurd.

An amendment that prohibits all public employees from using any other language than English to do their job in a state whose Hispanic population is growing as fast as any other in the nation appears somewhat misplaced. What would be the purpose of imposing restrictions on government employees?

Proponents of the amendment point to cost savings in state printing and publications, or the cost of bilingual education services and programs.

Some supporters of the Official English Amendment point to other countries who have had a multitude of languages and fear that our country will follow their paths of societal breakdown and disorder - many refer to the debate of Quebec's separation from Canada as an example of a language- based dispute.

Others say that if the state succumbs to one community's demand for attention, i.e., the Hispanic community, How can it refuse similar cries from other communities, i.e., the German, Pacific-Asian, Italian?

How many languages can a nation support, they ask.

In order to maintain the integrity of the land, communication must remain constant and consistent, and for the proponents of the Official English Amendment, one single, an official language is the only answer.

The land of the free seems to apply only to those who are not bound and gagged by a foreign language.

For those burdened with the dialect of their ancestors, freedom can only be found in speaking the language of a people who do not welcome them.

The bravery of those who have left their home land to come and start anew in an alien nation is displaced by fear and uncertainty from those who view immigrants as economic terrorist, pillaging jobs and resources thought saved exclusively for English-speaking Americans.

What about the costs to the users - the costs to those who cannot utilize goods and services because of language barriers and end up paying indirectly through imposed fees or penalties.

What about access to health care, welfare, social security, public and private transportation, job searching, equal employment opportunities, and educational opportunities?

An even larger predicament would be to find themselves becoming further trapped by being barred from participating in the democratic process.

The anti-immigrant tenor has increased in recent years, from this land built by immigrants, made great by immigrant ingenuity, work ethic, and perseverance.

When limited resources are at hand, the response has been to limit those who would consume those resources. The trend is to redistribute priorities.

America appears to be losing its identity amongst the many "hyphenated Americans", e.g., African-American, Mexican-American, Asian-American, Italian-American, etc. America needs to be American and all these immigrants and foreign languages are undermining the American identity and sapping the resources that gave birth to the American dream.

Once again, the non-political part of our government, the judiciary, has made a potent political statement.

By rendering the case moot, they have implied that the constitutionality of an English-only requirement, imposed in a nation of immigrants, will not be interpreted to violate their 14th Amendment rights.

They have dodged their responsibility to protect the "privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States" and avoided their duty to prohibit any state from depriving any person life, liberty, or property, or "equal protection under of the laws."

David H. Benton is a 3rd year law student, sits on the Cabinet of the Student Body President, and is a board member of the Arizona Students' Association. His column, 'Another Perspective,' appears every Tuesday.

By David H. Benton (columnist)
Arizona Daily Wildcat
March 25, 1997