• Skip to main content
  • Skip to secondary menu
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • About
  • Press Room
  • Poverty & Race Journal
  • Donate
  • Publications
    • PRRAC Publications & PRRAC Authors
    • PRRAC Policy Briefs
    • PRRAC Advocacy Resources
    • PRRAC Advocacy Letters
  • Events
  • Contact

PRRAC — Connecting Research to Advocacy

Poverty & Race Research Action Council

MENUMENU
  • Fair Housing
    • Fair Housing Homepage
    • Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH)
    • Housing Mobility & the Housing Choice Voucher Program
    • Source of Income Discrimination
    • Low Income Housing Tax Credit
    • Fair Housing and Community Development
    • Civil Rights and Housing Finance Reform
    • Federal Housing Advocacy – Other Programs
  • Social Housing
  • School Diversity
    • School Diversity
    • National Coalition on School Diversity Website
  • Housing-Schools Intersections
  • Special Projects
    • Civil Rights History
    • Civil Rights & The Administrative State
    • Environmental Justice
    • International Human Rights and U.S. Civil Rights Policy
    • PRRAC In the Courts
    • Title VI Repository
  • Search
    • Search

You are here: Home / Poverty & Race Journal / Proposition 187: Racism Leads to Deaths and More Poverty,

Proposition 187: Racism Leads to Deaths and More Poverty,

February 1, 1995 by

On November 8, 1994, California voters approved (59% to 41%) Proposition 187, the so-called “Save Our State” initiative. Proposition 187 denies public education, public medical services (except emergency services) and social services to undocumented persons, and requires doctors, teachers, social service providers and police to report suspected undocumented persons to the Immigration and Naturalization Service and the California Attorney General. Overnight, these professionals were partially stripped of their integrity and lost their students’, patients’ and community members’ trust in them as they became agents of the INS. The measure had been publicly opposed by health associations, educators, the Clinton Administration, boards of education, city councils, law enforcement associations, labor unions, civil rights communities and even leading conservatives -former HUD Secretary Jack Kemp and former Education Secretary and National Drug Czar William Bennett. Yet despite this vast array of opposition forces, the proposition passed. Why?

In Fall 1993, a Time magazine survey revealed that only 24% of those polled believe that most immigrants come into the U.S. legally, when in fact over three-quarters do; and that 64% believe most immigrants enter illegally, when in fact only less than one-quarter do. The Los Angeles flmes reported that 70% of whites voted for Proposition
187, while 78% of Latinos, 56% of Mrican Americans and 54% of Asians voted against it.

Proponents of 187, including its drafter, former INS Commissioner Alan Nelson, deny that racism played a part in the vote and point to what actually was a relatively close vote in the African American and Asian American communities. But without a doubt, race was the linchpin that drove this issue. In a state where minorities are 45% of the population (Latinos 25%, Asians 10%, Blacks 8%, Native Americans 2%), immigrant-bashing has increased tremendously. In addition, with the downturns in the economy, including military base closures in California that have thrown many workers into unemployment, many have found it convement to blame the problems on the increasing numbers of non-white immigrants. In comparison, in New York, immigrants have not been the targets, as yet. This may be due in part to the fact that there the largest number of undocumented are Italians, followed by the Irish.

Civil rights groups immediately filed suit challenging 187 as unconstitutional and in violation of federal laws. US District Court Judge Matthew Byrne in Los Angeles enjoined enforcement of all of Proposition 187 (Gregorio T. v. Wilson), except those provisions dealing with the manufacture, distribution and use of false documents, pending a hearing on a motion for a preliminary injunction. On December 14, US District Court Judge Mariana Pfaelzer in Los Angeles issued a preliminary injunction against enforcement of those provisions of Proposition 187 earlier enjoined by Judge Byrne. This action suspends implementation of the medical services, social services and K-12 education elements of the law until a request for a permanent injunction is either granted or denied -which could be months or years away. In a related action, Judge Stuart Pollack of the SF Superior Court on November 9 blocked enforcement of all of the educational provisions of 187, including those covering higher education (the community college system, Univ. of California and the California State Univ. system). A hearing on the preliminary injunction in this case is scheduled for February 8.

Newspapers have already reported the deaths of two individuals after the elections: a Latino boy and an elderly Chinese woman who did not seek medical help for their illnesses for fear of deportation. Clinics report a drop in the number of patients, largely due to the fear in the community. Civil rights and social services groups are encouraging students to attend school and people to seek services, since the law has been enjoined.

Civil rights groups are gearing up for further fights as similar measures are being drafted for introduction on other states’ ballots and in Congress. It will be a tough fight, but there is a silver lining in this whole issue: thousands of doctors, teachers, social service providers, nurses and police officers have been rudely thrown into the immigration debate and used by the forces of hate and xenophobia. These professionals stood overwhehningly against Proposition 187. In addition, thousands of high school students protested 187 through walkouts and demonstrations. A substantial part of California’s next generation has been politicized in the process. This growing opposition will be a strong base to continue opposing implementation of 187 and other similar measures.

Filed Under: Poverty & Race Journal, Symposium Responses Tagged With: civil rights groups, judge matthew byrne, proposition 187, Proposition 187: Racism Leads to Deaths and More Poverty, public education, public medical services, save our state, social services

You might also like…

“Retooling Community-Building for Racial Equality” by Keith Lawrence (November-December 2006 P&R Issue)
“Why Structural Racism? Why a Structural Racism Caucus?” by Anne C. Kubisch (November-December 2006 P&R Issue)

Primary Sidebar

PRRAC Updates

PRRAC Update: New issue of Poverty & Race; SSAB transitions; holiday gift guide (November 25, 2025)

PRRAC Update (November 13, 2025): Proposed CFPB rule; rural social housing; government re-opening

PRRAC Update (October 30, 2025): Federal civil service decimation; new PRRAC & NHLP publications

Previous Updates...

PRRAC in the News

Discrimination cases unravel as Trump scraps core civil rights tenet

June 1, 2025

Trump Just Issued an Executive Order Aimed at Decimating the Civil Rights Act of 1964

May 4, 2025

Ballot measure seeks to end discrimination based on source of rental income in Lincoln, Nebraska

April 16, 2025

What Trump’s DEI Orders Could Mean for Housing

February 21, 2025

Previous Posts...

Poverty & Race Journal

Footer

PRRAC – Poverty & Race Research Action Council

The Poverty & Race Research Action Council (PRRAC) is a civil rights law and policy organization based in Washington, D.C. Our mission is to promote research-based advocacy strategies to address structural inequality and disrupt the systems that disadvantage low-income people of color. PRRAC was founded in 1989, through an initiative of major civil rights, civil liberties, and anti-poverty groups seeking to connect advocates with social scientists working at the intersection of race and poverty…Read More

Archives

Resources at PRRAC

  • Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
  • Environmental Justice
  • Fair Housing
  • Fair Housing & Community Development
  • Low Income Housing Tax Credit
  • Poverty & Race Journal
  • PRRAC Update
  • School Diversity
  • Housing Choice Voucher Mobility
  • PRRAC in The Courts

Copyright © 2025 · Magazine Pro on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in var _ctct_m = "7608c7e98e90af7d6ba8b5fd4d901424"; //static.ctctcdn.com/js/signup-form-widget/current/signup-form-widget.min.js

PRRAC — Connecting Research to AdvocacyLogo Header Menu

  • Fair Housing
    • Fair Housing Homepage
    • Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH)
    • Housing Mobility & the Housing Choice Voucher Program
    • Source of Income Discrimination
    • Low Income Housing Tax Credit
    • Fair Housing and Community Development
    • Civil Rights and Housing Finance Reform
    • Federal Housing Advocacy – Other Programs
  • Social Housing
  • School Diversity
    • School Diversity
    • National Coalition on School Diversity Website
  • Housing-Schools Intersections
  • Special Projects
    • Civil Rights History
    • Civil Rights & The Administrative State
    • Environmental Justice
    • International Human Rights and U.S. Civil Rights Policy
    • PRRAC In the Courts
    • Title VI Repository
  • Search
  • About
  • Press Room
  • Poverty & Race Journal
  • Donate
  • Publications
    • PRRAC Publications & PRRAC Authors
    • PRRAC Policy Briefs
    • PRRAC Advocacy Resources
    • PRRAC Advocacy Letters
  • Events
  • Contact