An update on 9500Liberty from The Austin Chronicle   in Phoenix, AZ. Perhaps this review is the most accurate of all the different accounts of what really happened in Prince William County. Obviously, 9500Liberty has become very relevant in recent weeks and months as things heat up over immigration in Arizona.

This interesting documentary, which has spent the last half-year on the film-festival circuit, has achieved, rather suddenly, the utmost in topicality in the wake of Arizona’s passage of its infamous “show me your papers” law. Byler and Park’s film records the 2007-2008 events in Prince William County, Virginia, that surrounded the passage of a similar measure aimed at curbing illegal immigration.

The county board of supervisors there unanimously passed a law requiring police officers to stop anyone whom they had probable cause to believe was an illegal alien. Byler and Park, co-founders of the Coffee Party, were there to observe every public moment as the board wrestled with the fallout and concerned citizens galvanized around both sides of the issue. Events grew more complicated once the police chief calmly informed the board that new taxes would have to be passed in order cover the $14 million of estimated extra expenses to train his people in the details of upholding the law and to purchase cameras to mount on the dashboards of all police cruisers.

Most telling, however, was the eventual testimony of the leaders of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), the group ultimately behind both the Virginia and Arizona initiatives. In Virginia, the group helped guide the efforts of the indefatigable blogger who founded Help Save Manassas, the group that led the charge against the illegal aliens.

In the end, this film exposes the calculatedness of politicians who exploit the immigration issue as a boon to their election bids. Part of what makes 9500 Liberty so special is what Byler and Park did with their footage before it was assembled into this feature film. They created a YouTube channel and posted all their interviews and clips online as they were gathered, and they encouraged viewer participation in shaping the material and steering the filmmakers toward unexamined aspects of the subject.

In time, the Virginia statute was amended to eradicate the “probable cause” provision, so that a person’s legal status could not be investigated unless the individual was first apprehended for another crime. The film has served as a cautionary tale, until the legislators in Arizona, of course, stirred things up again. Byler, whose previous narrative films Americanese and Charlotte Sometimes both won Audience Awards at previous South by Southwest Film Festivals. 9500 Liberty has little of the flowing grace of those movies and evidences the jagged video look and on-the-fly cinematography common to so many modern documentaries. Yet what this film has in urgency and timeliness makes it a unique witness to our times.

Eric and Annabel were certainly in the right place at the right time.

Immigration Resolution

34 Thoughts to “9500Liberty Runs in Maximum Overdrive in Arizona”

  1. Second-Alamo

    So unabated mass immigration of unskilled and financially dependent people into this country by the hundreds of thousands each year is something to be supported? I don’t get it! When does the tax paying citizen have the right to speak out? Please tell me how this situation helps this country, or anyone but those flooding across the border. While Americans have spent decades trying to solve poverty we now are suppose to embrace importing it? Great idea, lets expand the inner city ghettos, that will surely turn this nation around!

  2. Many of the people who were here in Prince William County certainly weren’t what I call living in poverty. Some where, some weren’t. Then there is the entire argument about poverty being relative. Then there is the argument about location. Is someone less poor if they are poor in Mexico rather than in Phoenix or vice versa?

    And no one has ever said that there weren’t problems, SA. I certainly have never said that. I have criticized the HOW part of how problems were solved…

  3. Second-Alamo

    Criticizing how the problem is solved is a waste of time. What we need is everyone’s support in PREVENTING the problem in the first place. This is why all this finger pointing and PC BS is so aggravating, because it’s NOT preventing the problem! Remove the problem, period, don’t tell me I have to learn to live with it.

  4. TWINAD

    I strenuously disagree with SA’s assertion above. The immigrants that are coming to this country, are, for the most part, not the bottom of the barrel from their countries. It takes guts, wherewithal, intelligence and drive to make the trip here in the first place, leaving all family behind. They are the natural leaders, many of them, and they come here to make a better life. I can’t stress enough that MOST OF THE ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS HERE ARE NOT DAYLABORERS!!!!. I have said it before, I know probably more than 100 illegal immigrants (by the way, many of them have received green cards in the last 10 years…they may have been illegal when I met them, but they are not now) and pretty damn near half of those people I know run their own businesses…I know a plumber, a home remodeler, countless cleaning companies of all kinds, day care providers, roofers…the list goes on. And the other people all have jobs they have held for many, many years and are viewed as indispensable by their employers. I can only think of a handful of people I know that have switched jobs multiple times over the years and I DON’T KNOW ANY DAY LABORERS! Also, of all those people I know, there is no way they are a net drain on society. I don’t know of any that have used all the “services” so many people complain they are draining. When a guy gets hurt during a soccer game that doesn’t have insurance, each of the 100-200 spectators throws in $10 to pay his hospital bill. I’ve SEEN it, multiple times! They are not getting food stamps/welfare/free lunches. They are full paying customers every where they go. While this may not be true of ALL illegal immigrants, it is also unfair to portray them ALL as doing all these things. It is so NOT true! And so many illegal immigrants are single men…what kind of drain on services are they? They don’t have kids in school, don’t have huge hospital bills for having kids, don’t use food stamps or welfare to feed themselves. I just get angry when I see the myths spewed as the holy gospel truth. I want to know how many illegal immigrants SA knows, personally. How many, SA? Anyone else out there care to comment on the illegal immigrants that they know personally? And what kind of people they are?

  5. Second-Alamo

    T, it really doesn’t matter, because if illegal immigration is considered a national PROBLEM, then no amount of rationalizing by you or anyone else is going to change that. If you can convince the nation that it isn’t a PROBLEM, then I’ll listen to you, but until then PROBLEMS are to be PREVENTED!

  6. TWINAD

    See, I see the PROBLEM as your inability (and others just like you) to get past the fact that you might have to walk past families speaking another language on a trip to a local park.

  7. The HOW is very important. That is what separates Americans from less civilized countries. That’s what keeps us from being Hitlers or Stalins or Milosevices.

    We never are allowed to forget the HOW of how we do things.

  8. What happened in PWC is happening everywhere, from Ohio to Arkansas to Europe and Asia. Migration is an international challenge.

    I thought 9500 Liberty captured well how our community is dealing with its changing population — especially the anger, fear, frustration and scapegoating on ALL sides of the issue. It is a film best watched with a chance for facilitated dialogue afterwards.

    A screening of the film will be held at the Bull Run Unitarian Universalist congregation, 9350 Main Street, Manassas, on Saturday, June 19 at 6:00 pm. A panel discussion follows. Tickets are $10 at the door.

  9. Elena

    Cindy,
    I will do a thread on that to invite everyone!

  10. whatever

    Wouldn’t facilitated dialogue include a view from the other side? This film is so one sided it makes me laugh.

  11. “The county board of supervisors there unanimously passed a law requiring police officers to stop anyone whom they had probable cause to believe was an illegal alien.”

    This is not correct. Prince William never directed police to stop people because they had probable cause to believe they were illegal aliens. Instead, the county police were to investigate immigration status if there was probable cause ONLY AFTER some other lawful arrest or detention for some other crime. This is an important distinction.

    As I understand the Arizona law, it’s the same thing. Police officers are not supposed to go out looking for illegal aliens. However, if they come into otherwise lawful contact with someone and they have reasonable suspicion, they are required to look into immigration status.

    Based on my understanding, one BIG difference between the laws is that in Arizona the state has made a federal immigration violation a state crime. So, for example, if the AZ police come into contact with an illegal alien under their policy during a traffic stop, they have the power to arrest that person based solely on the immigration violation. In Prince William, the police have never had this power (it would require a state law change). Instead, even under the “probable cause” standard, if a police officer had discovered an illegal alien during a traffic stop, all he could do was call ICE. If ICE wanted the person (not likely), I suppose the officer could detain him until ICE arrived. However, if ICE was not interested (most likely unless the person was a murderer or rapist), all the officer could do would be to take that person’s name (probably an alias) and put it in the file.

    With all that said, I certainly understand the argument that the politics of the situations are very similar. However, the policies themselves (even prior to Prince William’s changes) are quite different.

  12. Food for Thought, you might want to go back and recheck the original Resolution. It most certainly was based on probable cause.

    The resolution evolved according to the article above. The powers that be found out the actual cost and liabilities of probable cause and went with physical arrest verification of status…for everyone. Much less problematic.

    We have police officers who have been deputized to function as ICE agents.

  13. Whatever, do you realize how foolish that comment sounds?

    You obviously haven’t seen the film or you would realize that part of its strength is that both sides were shown, thus the interviews with Stewart, Letiecq, Pannell, and the numerous comments from those in various speaking situations.

  14. Kris Kobach, the F.A.I.R. attorney who says he co-wrote the AZ law, is now on cable news trying to do a remake of his image. Apparently the Nativist tag hung by SPLC is starting to stick.

  15. Moon-
    How can I find the old materials? By the way, did you actually read my comment? I never said the original resolution wasn’t based on “probable cause. But there is a big difference between saying “go out and walk the streets and if you have probable cause to believe someone is illegal, stop them and ask for their papers,” and “go out and do your regular job and if you come into contact with someone in the course of your job through traffic stop, arrest etc., you should check immigration is there is probable cause.” The former means police are just stopping people for no reason, while the latter means that people are stopped for other legitmate reasons and then the immigration check is secondary.

    The review says “The county board of supervisors there unanimously passed a law requiring police officers to stop anyone whom they had probable cause to believe was an illegal alien.” This would be the former scenario, while my understanding of the county’s original policy was something more akin to the latter. However, if you can point me in the right direction, I’ll double check!

  16. I understood that the original was the former scenario. And yes I read your comments. That’s why I responded as I did. Check with the police department papers. It might have the original there. I might also have it in my archives. I will check.

    I must have misunderstood you. My apologies if I did.

    @FFT

  17. FYI all, Netflix has Eric Byler’s film, Charlotte Sometimes.

  18. FFT, Here is a post article referring the original. I did not realize there was a resolution before July 10. 2007.

  19. Thanks for the reference point Moon. The site says the cops were to “Develop a new policy, which instructs police officers to inquire into the citizenship or immigration status of persons who are lawfully detained for a violation of state or local law.”

    In other words, the policy said they had to wait until they actually detained someone for a violation of state or local law before they made the inquiry as to immigration upon probable cause. Thus, the “original resolution” was the later scenario, not the former.

    Still, the concern about racial profiling is real because there is a danger that a cop is going to come up with some pretext to pull over someone who “looks illegal.” Hey, I noticed you have a broken tail light–and by the way, what is your immigration status. However, to be fair, stating that “The county board of supervisors there unanimously passed a law requiring police officers to stop anyone whom they had probable cause to believe was an illegal alien” is not correct.

  20. Poor Richard

    Tomorrow the 16th Annual Manassas Heritage Railway Festival
    & Civil War Weekend will be held in Old Town Manassas from
    8am to 4pm. Admission is free.

    For complete information check today’s N@M or
    http://www.historicmanassas.org

    We look forward to a large, happy and diverse crowd of thousands
    having a good time. (Think Eric and Annabel will film that? Sure.)

  21. Vigilant Vulture

    @Poor Richard
    If they were in town they might, Mr. Richard. However, they are very busy with screenings in Arizona.

  22. After much ado, I have found what i believe is the Immigration Resolution of July 10, 2007. It is posted up at the bottom of the thread. Click Immigration Resolution. It is a pdf file.

  23. Food, I posted it. The wording is very tricky. The one that was written before the one that was passed was apparently even more draconian.

    I agree about the old broken tail light and that was my concern with probable cause. Women out past when cops think they should be always are subject to that kind of crap. Speeding, going too fast for current conditions (its dark, snowing raining, etc) easily skirt us around probably cause.

    I don’t think that Latinos would do any better with that than middle age white women. How do you prove you weren’t speeding? I know of women who have had a hanging license plates being given as a reason for stopping someone.

    You don’t have to go real far to find a place where if you drive through a parking lot more than once, of public property, waiting for a friend, you will get stopped. Your passengers must produce a license also.

  24. PR, I don’t think you are willing to accept that Eric and Annabel saw a very real problem and documented it. It should have been documented. They showed all sides of the problem and interviewed many different people with varying opinions.

    Is there going to be a problem at the Railroad festival? I don’t think so.

    Of the people who have seen the film, the biggest complaint I have heard is that they went too easy on Corey Stewart and his band of merry men. Eric gave Corey every chance in the world to redeem himself. He always liked Corey.

  25. Poor Richard

    M-H, I don’t think Eric, Annabel or Fernandez realize Liberty Street is in
    the City of Manassas which had nothing at all to do with the PWC resolution.
    We were/are being used as a target of opportunity by people with
    their own selfish agendas and who don’t care who and what they hurt
    in their quest for fame and fortune. We are real people in a real
    community – not a movie prop. And what are you telling me, if there
    isn’t “trouble” at an event, Eric and Annabel aren’t interested? Thousands
    of people from our entire community having a good time on a
    Saturday morning won’t create enough buzz on the indie circuit?

    (And “Corey and his band of merry men” are not our governing body!
    I know his actions gnaw on many of you, but should the citizens
    of Old Town Manassas have to pay the price for that?)

    1. PR, Eric and Annabel didn’t put the sign up. It was there. They reported it. They reported it in their own medium rather than in print media or TV media. I don’t think the City of Manassas has come up in any of the reviews I have read.

      I think your real beef is with Guardencio Fernandez, not Annabel and Eric. Do you also blame the Washington Post , Channel 7, Fox News, et al and the Manassas News and Messenger for reporting on the sign?

      I have seen that film several times and will probably see it several more times. I never saw where the City of Manassas was hormed or disparaged in the film.

      My suggestion that there was no problem sure got turned into a political twist. This community had a problem. They documented it. Do we also grouse about those who documented the run-down and over-crowded homes? That happened also. All sides need to be told.

  26. Again, all jurisdictions are dealing with the same issues of our changing population. Liberty Street is everywhere. It’s less a location than a message — stop treating people as if they have no value. We are all human beings.

  27. Elena

    food for thought :“The county board of supervisors there unanimously passed a law requiring police officers to stop anyone whom they had probable cause to believe was an illegal alien.”
    This is not correct. Prince William never directed police to stop people because they had probable cause to believe they were illegal aliens. Instead, the county police were to investigate immigration status if there was probable cause ONLY AFTER some other lawful arrest or detention for some other crime. This is an important distinction.
    As I understand the Arizona law, it’s the same thing. Police officers are not supposed to go out looking for illegal aliens. However, if they come into otherwise lawful contact with someone and they have reasonable suspicion, they are required to look into immigration status.
    Based on my understanding, one BIG difference between the laws is that in Arizona the state has made a federal immigration violation a state crime. So, for example, if the AZ police come into contact with an illegal alien under their policy during a traffic stop, they have the power to arrest that person based solely on the immigration violation. In Prince William, the police have never had this power (it would require a state law change). Instead, even under the “probable cause” standard, if a police officer had discovered an illegal alien during a traffic stop, all he could do was call ICE. If ICE wanted the person (not likely), I suppose the officer could detain him until ICE arrived. However, if ICE was not interested (most likely unless the person was a murderer or rapist), all the officer could do would be to take that person’s name (probably an alias) and put it in the file.
    With all that said, I certainly understand the argument that the politics of the situations are very similar. However, the policies themselves (even prior to Prince William’s changes) are quite different.

    You are incorrect actually. Probable cause was for any “contact” with a police officer. The reality was that it was “pre” arrest, citizens were able to work with government to get “post” arrest amended. Probable cause was RESCINDED from the resolution. I guess you haven’t seen the film.

  28. Elena

    Arizona has made it a “crime” to be the country without proper papers. Simply by existing in Arizona as an undocumented person is a crime. If an officer has probable cause to believe you are “illegal” immigrant, then he/she is required to ask you about your status. Read the law, its very tricky thoughout. In fact, if you are caught transporting somone who is not here lawfully, your car will be impounded and you have substantial fine to pay. Not as a “coyote” mind you, there is seperate language for smuggling people into the country. This is if you knowingly have a person in your vehicle who is undocumented.

  29. I put up the actual printed form of the Immigration Resolution. It is at the bottom of the post in this thread.

  30. Poor Richard

    Sorry Cindy, facts matter.

    And yes, we are all human beings – including ALL the citizens of
    the City of Manassas.

  31. PR, I am trying to understand why you are so angry over a movie you haven’t seen. Have you listened to someone else, do you object to the title, …what is it?

    Having seen the film, I don’t understand why you are so opposed to this film.

    I hated that sign, by the way, and everyone who knows me knows I hate it.

  32. The neighbors at Liberty Street have suffered. I haven’t forgotten, PR.

Comments are closed.