Suchergebnisse

AbstractAs the United States has expanded its immigration control strategies, police participation in immigration enforcement has increased in scope and intensity. Local law enforcement agencies contribute to immigration enforcement in three key ways: through the direct enforcement of immigration law, through cooperation with federal immigration authorities, and through the everyday policing of immigrant communities. These enforcement approaches have consequences for unauthorized immigrants, and for the agencies and officers tasked with providing them police services. This article reviews local law enforcement practices and argues that future research should move away from an exclusive examination of police policies towards immigrants, to consider how the policing of immigrants actually occurs on the ground. Moreover, we argue that as long as discretionary arrests funnel removable immigrants into the deportation system, some immigrant communities will perceive policing as fundamentally unfair and discriminatory.

Since the issue of immigration and its effects on the United States persists and discussions on the topic continue to intensify, this article reviews public opinion trends on immigrants and immigration. We review Americans' overall assessment of immigrants and immigration-related issues such as immigrant impact on the U.S. economy, perceptions of elected officials' performance on handling immigration issues, and preferred approaches to immigration policy. We draw our frame work from Lapinski et al.'s 1997 Public Opinion Quarterly review of public attitudes and beliefs regarding immigrants and immigration. This study updates the trends presented in 1997, beginning in many cases with the final time point presented in that earlier article and including current national public opinion trends of questions not previously documented but which have become relevant to the current immigration debate. The current review reveals mixed attitudes, dualities in Americans' thinking, and splits on immigration issues. In the current review, public opinion is at times ambivalent, espousing certain attitudes that challenge others. In addition, less extreme attitudes are revealed in the public's view of certain policies as compared with Lapinski et al.'s piece. Spanning what will now be over a decade, public opinion indicates an increasing concern over immigration issues in addition to a lack of confidence in the ability of the country's leaders to address them. More than half of today's immigrants came to the United States in the 1990s, and their share of the population is at historically peak levels. Estimates indicate that between 1990 and 2000, the U.S. foreign-born population grew by more than 11 million. As the rise in the immigrant population has increased, so have debates over how best to handle immigration issues. Although policymakers have suggested a variety of possible solutions, public opinion seems deeply divided on how best to handle immigration. Adapted from the source document.

Canada has accepted immigrants since the turn of the century and has been a major player in the world wide movement of people. However, until the 1960s, most immigrants were white and from Western Europe. By the late 60s, Canada's immigration policy took on a more universalistic criteria and immigrants from around the world were able to enter. In 1971, Canada established a multicultural policy, reflecting the multi-ethnic composition of Canadian society. However, a quarter century later, economic and ideological pressures have forced the government of the day to rethink its immigration policy.The present paper reviews Canadian immigration policy and assesses the current situation. An analysis of the 1994 immigration consultation process is presented which led to the new changes in immigration policy. Recent changes in the organizational structure of the Department of Citizenship and Immigration and its policy are evaluated. The implications of the new immigration policy are discussed, particularly as it relates to Asian immigration.

Intractable problems, ones that defy solution because of conflicting lines of force, almost always require an outside catalyst for any movement toward an answer. This Essay explores intractability through two parallel historical moments of conflict: debate over slavery in ante-bellum America and debate over aliens in current America. Severe discrimination (based on difference, racial prejudice, communal identity formation, and larger psychological needs) deprives these disadvantaged groups of human rights and the protection of law. Nineteenth-century slavery and twenty-first century illegal immigration also share another quality. Both stimulate virulent forms of rhetorical excess that endanger the body politic and threaten the social fabric of an increasingly divided United States. The connection of law and literature offers a catalyst, an opportunity for a change in perspective through the power of fiction. As Harriet Beecher Stowe's novel, Uncle Tom's Cabin, forced recognitions of a common humanity against slavery, so Henry Roth's classic immigrant novel, Call It Sleep, indicates some of what is currently needed now. The synergy between legal and literary forms of address encourages a deeper realization, and that realization, in turn, raises a question about intractable problems in general. Can the rule of law, when law itself is questioned, respond through its equal partner, the right to free expression?

The paper examines immigration and assimilation processes of Somalis in Minnesota. Does America have an assimilation problem? There are two competing answers to the preceding question: Barone (2001) says "no" because immigrants have always blended. By contrast, Fonte's (2001) answer is "yes" because today's assimilating forces are much different than those that prevailed in the early twentieth century. Drawing on African American experiences, Somalis face several challenges: cultural differences, English Language, racism, social and economic inequalities. Additionally, African immigrants, generally, have difficulty grasping the concept of race in America because everyone is identified by the skin-color rather than by their nationality. Therefore, racial and cultural backgrounds can complicate the process of assimilation for Somalis. Arguably, there is a relationship between immigration and assimilation.

The recent impetus of tougher immigration-related measures passed at the state-level raises concerns about the impact of such measures on the migration experience, trajectory and future plans of unauthorized immigrants. In a recent and unique survey of Mexican unauthorized immigrants interviewed upon their voluntary return or deportation to Mexico, almost a third reports experiencing difficulties in obtaining social or government services, finding legal assistance or obtaining health care services. Additionally, half of them report fearing deportation despite all of them being unauthorized. When we assess how the enactment of punitive measures against unauthorized immigrants, such as E-Verify mandates, has impacted their migration experience, we find no evidence of a statistically significant association between these measures and the difficulties reported by unauthorized immigrants in accessing a variety of services. However, the enactment of these mandates infuses deportation fear and reduces inter-state mobility among voluntary returnees during their last migration spell, and helps curb deportees' intent to return to the United States in the near future.