Fiction Over Facts: How Competing Narrative Forms Explain Policy in a New Immigration Destination1

U.S. immigration has changed dramatically in the last 20 years: immigrants have increasingly gravitated toward “new destinations” and a growing portion are undocumented. In the absence of federal comprehensive immigration reform, states are proposing a patchwork of laws. While some laws encourage immigrant integration, most seek restriction. To understand this trend, this article analyzes Utah as a new immigration destination, exploring its transformation from an inclusive to a restrictive state. It focuses on a major debate: whether to allow unauthorized residents legal driving privileges. Because Utah initiated this law earlier than most, it leads this debate. To explain its evolution, this article analyzes 10 years of legislative debates and articles published on this law. Building on the narrative studies literature, I find that both sides of the immigration debate utilized a public safety and well‐being narrative. However, supporters of the driver license law relied on a “lower mimetic” narrative, characterized by logic and factual arguments. In contrast, their opponents wove a compelling, “apocalyptic” narrative to criticize the law. This narrative indelibly linked immigration to the dangers of crime and terrorism and thus paved the way for the passage of one of the most restrictive immigration laws in the United States.     

The Immigration Industrial Complex: Why We Enforce Immigration Policies Destined to Fail

This article provides a genealogy of the idea of an immigration industrial complex. The immigration industrial complex is the confluence of public and private sector interests in the criminalization of undocumented migration, immigration law enforcement, and the promotion of ‘anti‐illegal’ rhetoric. This concept is based on ideas developed with regard to the prison and military industrial complexes. These three complexes share three major features: (a) a rhetoric of fear; (b) the convergence of powerful interests; and (c) a discourse of other‐ization. This article explores why Congress has not passed viable legislation to deal with undocumented migration, and instead has passed laws destined to fail, and has appropriated billions of dollars to the Department of Homeland Security to implement these laws. This has been exacerbated in the context of the War on Terror, now that national security has been conflated with immigration law enforcement. This is the first in a two‐part series on the immigration industrial complex.     

Unauthorized Migrants and the (Il)Logic of “Crime Control”: A Human Rights Perspective on US Federal and Local State Immigration Policies

Immigration control, widely regarded the sovereign right of nation states, has often been pursued at the expense of civil and human rights. More than a century ago, nativists legitimated a punitive approach to immigration control that treated migrants’ rights as secondary by branding millions of newcomers to the United States as a “dangerous class”. In many ways, recent policies similarly criminalize immigrants and deploy crime control strategies in response. This article reviews the most significant of these policies at the federal and local state level, including: border security measures, detention and deportation, the 287(g) program, anti‐immigrant city ordinances, and the Arizona law (SB1070). Each initiative has been framed as necessary to protect American citizens from serious crime. We focus on four ways in which these policies violate human rights: first, border security measures that result in migrant deaths violate the right to life; second, detention and deportation violate the right to liberty; third, detention and deportation punish unlawful residents as though they were guilty of criminal rather than civil violations of the law, imposing penalties that are arbitrary and disproportionately harsh; and fourth, local state policies to counter illegal immigration encourage racial profiling, a practice that violates the right to freedom from discrimination.     

Who “They” Are Matters: Immigrant Stereotypes and Assessments of the Impact of Immigration

We investigate the relationship between stereotypes of immigrants and assessments of the impact of immigration on U.S. society. Our analysis exploits a split‐ballot survey of registered voters in Ohio, who were asked to evaluate both the characteristics of one of four randomly assigned immigrant groups and perceived impacts of immigration. We find that associations between impact assessments and stereotypes of Middle Eastern, Asian, and European immigrants are weak and fully attenuated by control covariates. By contrast, this relationship for Latin American immigrants is strong and robust to controls, particularly in the areas of unemployment, schools, and crime. Our findings suggest that public views of the impacts of immigration are strongly connected to beliefs about the traits of Latin American immigrants in particular.     

“Shifting the Power”: Youth Activists’ Narrative Reframing of the Immigrant Rights Movement

This article explores collective efforts by undocumented youth activists to use storytelling to reframe the debates around immigration reform and discursively position themselves as the rightful leaders of a movement that had been dominated by adult citizen‐advocates. Drawing on 19 months of fieldwork, 37 in‐depth interviews, and hundreds of pages of movement documents, I show how youth activists in the United States worked together to develop stories that: (1) drew into question the legitimacy of adult citizen‐advocates to speak on issues of immigration and (2) cast undocumented immigrant youth as the proper authorities on these matters. I argue that through collective storytelling and character work, the activists were able to subvert adult citizen authority and construct themselves as powerful, new collective actors in the contemporary immigrant rights movement. I conclude by discussing some of the practical implications and limitations of using narrative reframing strategies to advance the social change agendas of marginalized movement factions.     

Immigration reform in France and the United States: reflections and documentation

This paper analyzes similarities and dissimilarities in French and American efforts to come to grip with irregular migration. The symbolic importance of immigration reform is argued to be a key political concern in both nations, although the politics of immigration reform has assumed a more partisan flavor in France, particularly since the municipal elections of 1983. In France, the theme of control and security, associated with the notion of preventing "automatic" immigration which would endanger the cohesion of French society, was widely utilized for political ends prior to and after May 10, 1981 (the date of Francois Mitterand's investiture). The American government, on the other hand, is confronted with the unenviable task of obtaining a legislative consensus on legalization and employer sanctions through an approach seeking to harmonize and integrate the demands articulated by various groups: employers, unions, and alien and ethnic interest groups (principally Hispanic groups divided into a hierarchy along a recently arrived/established cleavage). The American situation most sharply differs from the French case in terms of the absence of a right/left political cleavage. The real effects of clandestine immigration are to be found at the local level. In France, as in the US, the ability of local actors to exert pressure raises the fear that legalization and sanctions will change little, except in terms of symbolic legitimacy.     

“No Thanks,We’re Full”: Individual Characteristics,National Context,and Changing Attitudes Toward Immigration1

In this paper we examine how individual‐level characteristics and national context affect attitudes toward immigration. Although many previous studies have compared attitudes toward immigration across countries, little attention has been paid to how attitudes may be affected by changes within a country over time. We take advantage of seventeen national Canadian Gallup surveys to consider how differences in national economic conditions and changing immigration flows affect attitudes and changes in attitudes between 1975 and 2000. While the state of the national economy affects attitudes this is not the case for the rate of immigration. Rather than affecting some groups more than others the state of the economy has a relatively uniform effect across groups. Our results also show that far from being a continuum, being anti‐immigration and being pro‐immigration are qualitatively different. Interest, ideology, and the national economy affect anti‐immigration sentiments, but only ideology affects pro‐immigration sentiments.     

Migration and Citizenship Law in Spain: Path‐dependency and Policy Change in a Recent Country of Immigration

This article analyzes the links between migratory processes and the evolution of nationality legislation in Spain. We argue that this case challenges the theoretical models that link immigration to liberalizing reforms in citizenship law. Despite large‐scale immigration experienced over the last two decades, Spanish nationality law has remained strongly focused on keeping ties with Spanish communities abroad. To account for the high degree of stability of Spanish citizenship law we structure our analysis along three basic lines: the historical conceptions derived from Spain's past as a colonial power, as well as its tradition as a country of emigration; the lack of incentives for political actors to introduce the reform of citizenship law in the political agenda; and the strategies adopted by those political actors in relation to the politicization of immigration.     

Whites’ Attitudes toward Immigrants and Immigration Policy: Are Multiracial Individuals a Source of Group Threat or Intergroup Contact?

This study uses multilevel modeling with data from the 2010 U.S. Census and the Pew Research Center’s 2006 and 2011 surveys to examine the relationship between the relative size of the multiracial population, specifically mixed-race whites, in metropolitan areas and the immigration attitudes of native-born non-Hispanic whites. The results indicate that whites who live in metropolitan areas with higher percentages of mixed-race whites are more likely to hold comparatively immigrant-friendly attitudes in general and specifically toward immigration levels, taxes, and employment, supporting contact theory. With increases in the multiracial population, whites are likely to adopt a more complex conception of race over time, leading to context-specific and topic-centered attitudes toward immigrants and immigration policy.     

From “illegality” to Tolerance and Beyond: Irregular Immigration as a Selective and Dynamic Process

Immigration defined as “illegal” is a typical area where the dominant representations differ from social phenomena. Starting from this point, this article deals with two issues. The first is the selective treatment of irregular immigration by receiving societies. Diverse interests and social representations of irregular immigration tend to redefine it in different ways: formal authorization and social recognition should be distinguished, and they can go in different directions. Their intersection determines four cases: exclusion, stigmatization, tolerance, integration. The second, and related, issue is the easier transition to a legal status of some irregular migrants, especially those who encounter some forms of tolerance in receiving societies. Three devices of regularization will be identified and discussed: deservingness; liberal legalization; victimization. In regard to processes of acceptance and legalization, the action of various intermediaries between the receiving societies and irregular immigrants will be highlighted.     

How Watershed Immigration Policies Affect American Public Opinion Over a Lifetime

Important political events are known to influence political socialization and development (Green, Palmquist, and Schickler 2002 ). It is also possible that such events impact political socialization within particular age cohorts, and also across important social groups who may be impacted differently by landmark events. This paper examines whether landmark immigration events can leave a permanent mark on an individual's views toward immigrants and immigration, and whether that impact varies across different ethnic/racial groups in the United States Specifically, we examine the cohort of individuals who were in their formative years during the passage of major US immigration bills that were proposed or enacted from 1965 to 2010. Altogether, we focus on four pieces of landmark immigration legislation. The findings reveal variations on the effect of these events depending on the group in question; a relationship also emerges between these landmark legislative events and attitudes on immigration policies. The analysis contributes to an ongoing debate regarding the ways in which political elites influence attitudes, and we discuss how the findings may apply to other contexts outside the US.     

Nationwide Newspaper Coverage of Immigration Reform: A Community Structure Approach

A community structure analysis compared community characteristics and nationwide coverage of immigration reform in newspapers in 21 major U.S. cities, sampling all 250+ word articles April 23, 2010 to November 12, 2013. The resulting 262 articles were coded for “prominence” and “direction” (“favorable,” “unfavorable,” or “balanced/neutral” coverage), then combined into each newspaper's composite “Media Vector” (range = .632 to ?.4800). Nineteen of 21 newspapers showed favorable coverage of immigration reform. Pearson correlations yielded 4 significant results, the most powerful of which supported immigration reform. The “vulnerability” hypothesis (media “mirror” the interests of marginal/disadvantaged groups) was essentially confirmed. Higher percentages below the poverty line (r = .607, p = .003) and higher crime rates (r = .490, p = .017) correlated with more favorable coverage of immigration reform. By contrast, higher percentages of women in the workforce (r = ?.543, p = .008) and higher proportions of hate crimes (r = ?.403, p = .048) were linked with less favorable coverage. Regression analysis yielded the percentage living below the poverty line accounting for 37.2% of the variance, and proportion of hate crimes yielded an additional 19.1% of the variance. The Midwest had by far the most favorable coverage of immigration reform, more than any other region.     

Trends in Latin American Skilled Migration: “Brain Drain” or “Brain Exchange”?

During the last half of the twentieth century the Latin American sub‐continent, historically a region of immigration, became one of emigration characterized by intra‐regional movements and movements towards the developed world, particularly the US. The emigration of highly skilled resources was a new phenomenon in the 1960s and debate on “brain drain” took a significant place in academia and in international organizations. In recent years, within the context of intensification of the globalization process and by virtue of the drive for technological development and the subsequent demand for specialization, the issue has returned to both the arena of political debate and to the academic world. This article presents an analysis of trends in Latin American migration in the context of the new situation. It discusses whether there is a continuation of the “brain drain” phenomenon or the emergence of a trend towards “brain exchange” or “brain circulation”, as appears to be occurring in other parts of the world.     

“This Should Not Be Happening in This Country”: Private‐Life Violence and Immigration Intersections in a U.S. Gateway City

In the United States, the rise in ethnic diversity due to immigration in recent decades has been most visible in new “gateway” cities and towns, such as the Baltimore–Washington, D.C. corridor, now the fourth‐largest gateway for new immigration. Among the more grave issues that immigrant women face in these gateways and elsewhere is the experience of intimate partner violence. This article reports on a study using qualitative methods to document the problem, approaches, and challenges in the rapidly diversifying city of Baltimore, Maryland. We report on individual and focus‐group interviews with professionals in 10 agencies who work directly with the Baltimore populations. Drawing on intersectionality theory, we propose a conceptual framework that disaggregates the location of “immigration” into four components: contexts of exit, contexts of reception, racial and class hierarchies, and culture. The study's results problematize cultural essentialist models and raise questions about current U.S. legal systems regarding immigration.     

Managing the National Status Group: Immigration Policy in Germany

This article challenges the established convention in immigration policy scholarship of treating economic utility and identity maintenance as logically distinct concerns. Drawing on work by Weber, Wallerstein and Bourdieu, we argue that concerns about economic utility and identity maintenance interact in the immigration policies of Western liberal democratic states, leading to policies designed to build and maintain middle‐class national status groups. Using the example of contemporary immigration policy in Germany, we illustrate how this impulse to build the middle‐class status group affects immigrant inclusion/exclusion in nuanced ways at both the group and individual levels, along class/status, ethnic and gender lines. We conclude by considering the policy implications of growing and shaping populations according to middle‐class ideals, particularly for the statistical monitoring of immigrant populations for integration benchmarking purposes.     

Discovering Immigration into Turkey: The Emergence of a Dynamic Field

In the last couple of decades, Turkey has become an important country of immigration. In parallel, a new scholarly field has developed to study this largely unrecognized phenomenon. In this paper, I take stock of this new literature. I first show how students of immigration into Turkey had to define the field in relation to the powerful existing fields studying emigration from Turkey and internal migration in Turkey, as well as how they distinguished between “old” and “new” immigration. I then study the emergence of this field under the lead of Ahmet ?çduygu and Kemal Kiri?ci. Later, with the establishment of two central research centres (CARIM and MiReKoç), the field gained important institutional anchors and attracted many new scholars. Today, the field is characterized by a strong dynamism, a plurality of talented scholars and a diversity of concerns and approaches. Even though the field is still at an early stage, it is bound to grow rapidly, as the phenomenon of migration into Turkey remains a highly strategic and lasting phenomenon. It is therefore crucial for the field to become self‐aware of its strength and weaknesses. Consequently, in the final section, I identify important future directions for the field, especially the need for scholars to better understand the diverse political ramifications (foreign and domestic politics) associated with immigration into Turkey.     

Immigration,trade and ‘ethnic surplus value’: a critique of Indo–Canadian transnational networks

It is often argued that countries hosting large populations of skilled immigrants might benefit from their cultural and economic competencies in the development of international trade networks. Yet, in so doing, the state can be criticized for fetishizing the ethnic immigrant in market terms in order to extract ‘ethnic surplus value’. In this article, I examine these debates empirically in the case of India–Canada immigration and trade using interviews with traders, officials and immigrant entrepreneurs in British Columbia, Canada. Findings suggest that the supposedly positive relationship between trade and immigration is not obvious in the India–Canada case and there is no convincing evidence of the state managing successfully to extract ‘ethnic surplus value’. Rather, what appears most compelling is evidence of what can be termed a discourse of regional disadvantage circulated by immigrant and non‐immigrant business actors alike regarding the nature of India–Canada relations. Interview respondents link this discourse of disadvantage to the regional history of Indian immigration to Canada, which has traditionally comprised Sikhs from rural Punjab, and it functions to essentialize Indian immigrant ethnicity spatially within both the Indian and Canadian contexts. I focus on the theme of the extraction of ‘ethnic surplus value’ and regional disadvantage to reveal the limitations of both arguments about the economic nature of immigrant‐led network development. In both cases, I challenge these ideas with a critical emphasis on the role of immigrant agency and offer a more nuanced and complicated reading of the role of the state. As a result, I offer a detailed reading of how socio‐spatial immigrant networks are formed and operate at the regional scale, and how this complicates more abstract theoretical formulations regarding the trade and immigration nexus.     

Reflections on the Sociology of Security and Surveillance in the Study of Immigration

In the last decade, sociologists have begun to address major issues associated with the rise of security and surveillance. My work suggests the ways in which a sociology of surveillance can contribute to the study of immigration and how, in turn, work on immigration can contribute to this new and growing field.     

LITIGATION AND SUBTERFUGE: CHINESE IMMIGRANT MOBILIZATION DURING THE CHINESE EXCLUSION ERA

I analyze historical changes in American immigration law and the subsequent responses of Chinese immigrants during the Chinese Exclusion Era. Using the political process model's concept of “political opportunity structure,” I examine how the indeterminate nature of the Chinese Exclusion laws provided key opportunities for mobilization. I present an interactive framework that considers not only how the broader political environment enabled and constrained the Chinese, but also how they responded by actively reshaping their environment. I apply this framework to the Chinese community's initial use of litigation and their move towards tactics of subterfuge in response to changes in Chinese exclusion policies. My findings show that the anti-Chinese immigration policies basically fulfilled their purpose, but led to unintended exploitation due to problematic language and enforcement.     

Immigration: an international economic perspective

The creation of an effective US immigration policy has been complicated by the diversity of political interests and the absence of reliable statistics to determine the magnitude of the impact on the American economy. Estimates of the number of illegal aliens in the US range from 1 to 12 million. While political biases and complexities and data inadequacies complicate this analysis, some generalizations seem to be confirmed by worldwide experience. There are 2 mutually-supportive, short-run ways to reduce the flow of undocumented workers: 1) to better police US borders and shorelines and 2) to remove the motive for entry by making it illegal for employers to hire workers who are not authorized to work in the US. To give employers an easy defense and to facilitate their compliance with immigration laws, an effective worker identification system should be developed. To avoid the civil liberties, international relations, and human problems associated with mass deportations, illegal immigrants who entered the US before January 1, 1981 and who have been in continuous residence for at least 1 year, should be permitted to remain in the US as permanent resident aliens. The US should not adopt a new guest worker program. The proper sequence of changes in immigration policy is very important. Dealing with illegal immigration is essential; all these measures should be in place before an amnesty is granted. Because it is important to have friendly relations with neighboring countries and because the ultimate solution to illegal immigration is to reduce the wide disparities in employment opportunities between countries, the US should work with other countries to control illegal immigration, but should not link control to energy, trade, or other policies. It is particularly important to discuss immigration control plans with other countries, especially Mexico, and to do everything consistent with US interests to minimize the adverse impact of our immigration policies on our neighbors.