The Death and Life of Aida Hernandez: A Border Story

by Aaron Bobrow-Strain

Arpaio’s rule was so bad that it violated the Constitution. Arpaio boasted that the draconian conditions saved taxpayer money. In fact, Arpaio’s tactics cost taxpayers a lot: during the twenty-four years he served as sheriff, his department would spend $140 million litigating and settling lawsuits over civil rights violations.

HAD SPENT 316 days in immigration detention. She had committed no crime worse than shoplifting, posed no threat to public safety, and, with her long ties to one hometown, was unlikely to have fled Douglas. Nevertheless, U.S. taxpayers paid approximately $52,000 to keep her locked down in medium-security prison conditions. That year, Corrections Corporation of America, the company operating Eloy, logged almost $160 million in profits. And the money trail didn’t end

The private contractor that ran the commissary where Aida bought food, stamps needed to send pictures to Gabriel, earbuds for the television, a single mug for coffee with Tomasita, and phone cards to call home made a fortune off captive consumers. As did the telecom contractor that connected detainees’ calls home. And before either of those companies could charge their inflated prices, Aida had to receive money transfers into her prison account at a dear cost via Western Union. If Aida’s almost year in Eloy accomplished anything for the United States, it was to make a lot of money for corporate shareholders.

framing support for undocumented immigrants in the language of virtue and achievement—“hardworking,” “family values,” “not criminals,” and “success stories”—I, and some parts of the immigrant rights movement, had tacitly condemned people like Aida who could not fit their lives into our narrow windows of approval. Emphasis on “model immigrants” and the “deserving poor” can help win important improvements for select groups, but it falls short for the vast majority of people—people with tougher, more complicated stories.