They watch for color: mixed-status couples experience with the police

This research qualitatively examines experiences with the police for 42 interracial mixed-status couples, living or originating mainly from the Southern United States. Race-based policing operates within a structure of racist nativism where white skin is a marker of U.S. citizenship, and brown skin is an indication of being foreign-born. Law enforcement at all levels, including the local level, situated their attention toward Latino immigrant men, especially those perceived as working-class, when compared to white U.S. citizen wives. The penalties for racial profiling included family strain through detention and deportation of Latin-American born men. In addition to human rights violations for undocumented Latino immigrants, U.S. citizens are serving as collateral damage in an already broken immigration system that racially profiles Latino immigrant men. Couples’ precariousness situations contest the rhetoric that police are only protecting citizens’ national security. Framed by racist nativism, the findings have implications for anti-oppressive, evidence-based immigration policy.     

From Loss of Services to Loss of Support: The Wrongful Death Statutes, the Origins of Modern Tort Law, and the Making of the Nineteenth-Century Family

The wrongful death statutes enacted in most states during the mid-nineteenth century have long represented a classic moment in the narrative of American legal history. Historians have not observed, however, that American wrongful death statutes amended the English act on which they were modeled to introduce a gender asymmetry peculiar to the United States. Led by New York, most American jurisdictions limited wrongful death actions to "the widow and next of kin" of the decedent, categories that did not include husbands of deceased wives. Thus, a wife could bring a wrongful death action for the death of her husband, but a husband could not bring a wrongful death action on his own behalf for the death of his wife.
The wrongful death statutes represent a heretofore unrecognized conjuncture of the beginnings of the modem law of torts with the nineteenth-century legal reconstruction of the family. The statutes mowed accident litigation away from an eighteenth-century model of masters suing for loss of the services of a servant, slave, wife, or child, toward the now more familiar model of suits for loss of wages and support. Moreover, the gender asymmetry of the statutes embodied and reproduced a new nineteenth-century conception of the family in which men worked as free laborers and women were confined to relatively narrow domestic roles, removed from the market and dependent for their support on the wages of their husbands. Indeed, the statutes anticipated by over half a century the American welfare state's two-track approach to support for wage-earning men and dependent women.     

The production of the "battered immigrant" in public policy and domestic violence advocacy

In the context of U.S. public policy, battered immigrant signifies a person who is eligible to adjust his or her status under immigration law if he or she can demonstrate they have suffered domestic violence in the United States perpetrated by a U.S. citizen or legal permanent resident. Among community organizers, the term battered immigrant signifies a broader range of people for whom legal immigration status plays a role in their options for safety planning and/or leaving an abuser, the potential threat of deportation, and the eligibility for public benefits. Based on an ethnographic study of domestic violence advocacy with South Asian immigrants in Seattle and around the United States, this article examines how the difference in signification has direct social and political consequences with regard to who may access the benefits and protection offered to victims of domestic violence in the United States.     

Conjugal Violence in Korean American Families: A Residue of the Cultural Tradition

The study explored the incidence of spouse abuse in Korean American families and interrelations between conjugal violence, marital power structure, stress, and socioeconomic and cultural factors. Rate of conjugal violence in these families is higher than those for other Asian American families. Data were collected from 256 families selected at random. In male dominant couples, rate of severe violence, wife beating, was four times higher than that of egalitarian couples. Husbands who experienced higher levels of stress had a greater rate of assaulting their wives. Wives in egalitarian and female dominant couples experienced a lower amount of stress and shared more decision-making power than did those in the male dominant couples. The longer the couples had been in the United States and the more American education they had received, the more egalitarian and female-dominant marital relations they tended to have. The residual influence of the traditional culture, in which they lived prior to immigration, is a factor suggesting why men were more abusive than women. Cultural differences associated with conjugal violence and needs for services are discussed.     

The Oppressed, the Suspect, and the Citizen: Subjectivity in Competing Accounts of Political Violence

By juxtaposing religious, legal, and victims'accounts of political violence, this essay identifies and critiques assumptions about agency, the individual, and the smte that derive from liberal theory and that underlie U.S. asylum taw. In the United States, asylum is available to aliens whose gooernments fail to protect them from persecution on the basis of their race, religion, political opinion, nationality, or social group membership. Salvadoran and Guatemalan immigrants have challenged this definition of persecution with their two-decade-long struggle for asylum in the United States. During the 1980s, U.S. religious advocates and solidarity workers took legal action on behalf of what they characterized as victims of oppression in Central America. The asylum claims narrated by the beneficiaries of these legal efforts suggest that repessiwe pactices rendered entire populations politically suspect. To prevail in immigration court, however, victims had to prove that they were individually targeted because of being somehow "different" from the population at large. In other words, to obtain asylum, persecution victims had to explain how and why their actions had placed them at risk, even though persecution obscured the reasons that particular individuals were targeted and thus rendered all politically suspect.     

DACA legal services: One federal policy,different local implementation approaches

In the United States, the absence of federal funding and coordination for immigration legal services often means that local resources determine immigrants' access to justice. Many of these resources go toward supporting immigrants caught in the detention and deportation system. Yet local support is also critical for implementing federal benefits programs such as the 2012 Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. In this article, we draw on 146 interviews with representatives of legal services providers and their nonprofit collaborators in three immigrant-dense metropolitan areas—the Greater Houston Area, the New York City Metro Area, and the San Francisco Bay Area—to analyze the distinct, place-specific service and collaboration models that have emerged over the last decade to meet demand for DACA implementation support. Specifically, we examine how local context shapes the types of actors that immigrants can turn to for immigration legal services, and how they have coordinated on the ground in distinct ways during a time of increasing uncertainty.     

Race,Immigration, and Policing: Chinese Immigrants’ Satisfaction with Police

A considerable body of research focuses on racial and ethnic minorities’ perceptions of police, yet non-Black, non-Hispanic minority groups, Asians in particular, are largely overlooked. Meanwhile, despite a fast growing immigrant population and the increasing demand on local police to enforce immigration law, research on police–immigrant relations remains limited. Using data from over 400 Chinese immigrants, this study examines the issues of race/ethnicity, immigration, and policing with a focal concern on Chinese immigrants’ attitudes toward police. Results indicate that the majority of Chinese immigrants rate police positively in overall performance and specific areas of effectiveness, integrity, and demeanor. Both universal and immigrant-specific factors are important predictors of immigrants’ attitudes. Chinese immigrants’ evaluations of police are not only affected by exposure to media coverage of police misconduct, neighborhood conditions, and city context, but also are intertwined with their opinions of their home country police and perceptions of US immigration authorities.     

Through the Back Door: Applying Theories of Legal Compliance to Illegal Immigration During the Chinese Exclusion Era

This article applies theories of legal compliance to analyze the making of this country's first “illegal immigrants”—Chinese laborers who crossed the U.S.‐Canadian and U.S.‐Mexican borders in defiance of the Chinese exclusion laws (1882–1943). Drawing upon a variety of sources, including unpublished government records, I explore the ways in which Chinese laborers gained surreptitious entry into the United States during this period and ask, what explains their mass noncompliance? I suggest that while an instrumental perspective is useful for understanding these border crossings, it overlooks other important determinants of noncompliance: normative values and opportunity structures. Specifically, the exclusion laws were widely perceived by the Chinese as lacking social and moral legitimacy, and thus not worthy of obedience. In addition, the existence of smuggling networks and liberal immigration policies in Canada and Mexico played a critical role in facilitating noncompliance. The article concludes with a discussion about the benefits and challenges of using this theoretical framework to analyze noncompliance in immigration law.     

Gendered Paths to Legal Citizenship: The Case of Latin‐American Immigrants in Phoenix,Arizona

In this paper we seek to contribute to a greater understanding of legal citizenship by exploring the gendered experiences of Latin‐American‐origin immigrants in the greater Phoenix metropolitan area as they go through the legalization process. To explore this gendered angle we rely on in‐depth interviews conducted from 1998 through 2008 with women and men from Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, and Mexico. The data reveal that although immigration policies and procedures are presumably gender neutral, they are in fact inflected with gendered meanings and enacted in gendered social structures. Gender ideologies permeate the processes to differentially affect the legalization, permanent legal residence, and citizenship processes of immigrant women and men. This article points to key gender inequalities in immigration law.     

Crime,deportation and the regulation of immigrants in Canada

Criminality is now one of the most frequently used provisions for deporting non-citizens from Canada. Individuals who are convicted of crimes outlined in current immigration policies can find themselves subject to deportation proceedings after they have served their sentences unless they are eligible to make an appeal and can do so successfully. This paper examines 177 reported immigration appeal hearings in Canada involving non-citizens who are ordered deported on the basis of criminality. Using documentary analysis along with basic statistics to analyze the appeal hearing decisions, I demonstrate how gender and racial ideologies shape the outcome of these decisions. Theories of moral regulation, social control and governmentality are employed to develop an understanding of the state's treatment of immigrants. That a significant number of immigrants in this study were not deported, but were granted stays with strict conditions highlights how deportation hearings are one mechanism for differentiating between ‘deserving’ and ‘undeserving’ immigrants. This study illustrates how, through the use of racial and gender ideologies, deportation practices are as much about differential exclusion as they are about enforced assimilation. Concerns around criminality rationalizes the ongoing regulation and surveillance of immigrants and the threat of deportation ensures their compliance.This research was funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC Grant No. 31-632203). An earlier version of this paper was presented at the British Society of Criminology Annual Meetings in Bangor, Wales, July 2003 and at the Canadian Law and Society Association Annual Meetings in Halifax, Canada, June 2003.     

Examining recidivism among foreign-born jail inmates: does immigration status make a difference over the long term?

The topic of ‘illegal’ immigration is currently the focus of intense ideological and policy debate in the United States. A common assertion is that those without legal immigration status are disproportionately involved in criminal offending relative to other foreign-born populations. The current study examines the long-term recidivism patterns of a group of male removable aliens compared to those foreign-born with legal authorisation to be present in the Unites States. The sample includes 1297 foreign-born males released from the Los Angeles County Jail during a 1-month period in 2002, and the follow-up period extends through 2011. Using three measures of rearrest and a rigorous counterfactual modelling approach, we find no statistically significant differences between the two groups in likelihood, frequency, or timing of first rearrest over 9 years. The findings do not lend support to arguments that removable aliens pose a disproportionate risk of repeat involvement in local criminal justice systems.     

REASSESSING THE BREADTH OF THE PROTECTIVE BENEFIT OF IMMIGRANT NEIGHBORHOODS: A MULTILEVEL ANALYSIS OF VIOLENCE RISK BY RACE,ETHNICITY, AND LABOR MARKET STRATIFICATION*

Researchers in the United States have increasingly recognized that immigration reduces crime, but it remains unresolved whether this applies to people of different racial–ethnic and economic backgrounds. By using the 2008–2012 area‐identified National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), we evaluate the effect of neighborhood immigrant concentration on individual violence risk across race/ethnicity and labor market stratification factors in areas with different histories of immigration. The results of our analysis reveal three key patterns. First, we find a consistent protective role of immigrant concentration that is not weakened by low education, low income, unemployment, or labor market competition. Therefore, even economically disadvantaged people enjoy the crime‐reduction benefit of immigration. Second, we find support for threshold models that predict a nonlinear, stronger protective role of immigrant concentration on violence at higher levels of immigrant concentration. The protective function of immigration also is higher in areas of longer histories of immigration. Third, compared with Blacks and Whites, Latinos receive a greater violence‐reduction benefit of immigrant concentration possibly because they live in closer proximity with immigrants and share common sociocultural features. Nevertheless, immigrant concentration yields a diminishing return in reducing Latino victimization as immigrants approach a near‐majority of neighborhood residents. The implications of these results are discussed.     

Latino Immigrant Acculturation and Crime

Recent debate on the future of immigration policy in the United States has spawned much discussion on social costs and consequences for immigrants, such as employment, education, health care, and most notably, crime. Although recent Latino immigrants are often portrayed as outsiders in popular media, their successful acculturation into the American way of life may present more crime-related risk rather than less. This study examines arrest records for Latinos in two southwestern American cities to determine the extent to which Latino acculturation is related to arrests and convictions for both misdemeanors and felonies after controlling for certain legal and extra-legal factors. Results indicate that acculturation is consistently and positively associated with all four crime-related outcomes in this sample. Implications for policy and future research are discussed.     

The Tragic Plight of HIV-Infected Haitian Refugees at Guantanamo Bay

Last June marked the 14th anniversary of the closing of the world’s first, and only, HIV camp at Guantanamo Bay. This article revisits the infamous legacy of the Guantanamo Bay camp and the plight of the HIV-infected Haitian political refugees during the early 1990’s. Part I summarises the development of the United States’ immigration policy and the government’s history for excluding immigrants for health related reasons. Part II details the factual and historical background leading to the mass exodus of the Haitians and the sequence of tragic events which resulted in their confinement at Guantanamo Bay. Part III focuses on the seminal case of Haitian Centers Council, Inc. v. Sale (II) (Haitian Centers Council, Inc. v. Sale, 823 F. Supp. 1028, 1049 (E.D.N.Y. 1993)) which was responsible for bringing about the closure of the HIV camp and granting parole to all HIV-infected refugees to enter the United States. The anticipated revolutionary reform of the HIV-exclusion policy emanating from this legal triumph never materialized. The United States government successfully sought to have the case vacated from the Court’s books. Consequently, the landmark precedent does not technically exist today. What does remain is the notorious HIV-exclusion policy which was distorted by the United States government to justify their detainment. Although the epic legal and emotional struggles of the Haitians are forgotten by many, the legacy of Guantanamo Bay continues to haunt the lives of those who were prisoners of the HIV camp.     

Attitudes toward Wife Abuse of Police Officers and Judiciary Members in Turkey: Profession,Gender, Ambivalent Sexism and Sex Roles

This study examined the attitudes of police officers and judiciary members toward wife abuse in Turkey and the relation between these attitudes and profession, ambivalent sexism (hostile/benevolent sexism), gender, and gender roles. The following instruments were used for the analyses: The Attitudes Toward Wife Abuse Scale (AWAS), the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory (ASI), and the Bem Sex Role Inventory. The participants were 300 police officers and 150 judiciary members selected from different regions of Turkey. Results showed that compared to judiciary members, police officers are more tolerant of physical and verbal abuse of women in marriage, but less tolerant of the idea of the victim leaving an abusive marriage partner. Similarly, men were more tolerant than women of those husbands who physically and verbally abuse their wives, but less supportive of the wife leaving the abusive partner. Profession and ambivalent sexism (hostile/benevolent sexism) were found to be the strongest predictors of attitudes toward wife abuse.     

National Estimates of Intimate Partner Violence and Service Receipt among Latina Women with Child Welfare Contact

A rise in the Latino population resulting from increased immigration to the United States over the past several decades has invoked increasing concern about factors contributing to the victimization of Latinas. The present study used the National Survey of Child and Adolescent Well-Being to explore experiences of physical intimate partner violence (IPV) and service receipt for IPV issues among Latina caregivers reported to the child welfare system for alleged child abuse or neglect. Results showed no significant differences in severity and overall rates of physical violence between immigrants and nonimmigrants, with the exception of the frequency of violence; U.S.-born women reported more incidents than immigrants. Despite experiencing a high overall rate of IPV during the previous year (33.0%), during the same period only 16.8% of Latinas reported being referred to services and 9.4% of mothers reported receiving services to address IPV issues. Despite evidence of disparities in use of other types of services by immigrant parents involved with the child welfare system, no differences in IPV service use were noted between immigrant and nonimmigrant mothers. Adjusting for covariates, neither nativity nor legal status was predictive of recent experiences of physical violence or service use. Potential reasons for these findings and implications are discussed.     

SAME SEX,DIFFERENT RIGHTS: AMENDING U.S. IMMIGRATION LAW TO RECOGNIZE SAME‐SEX PARTNERS OF REFUGEES AND ASYLEES

Overcoming a long history of anti‐gay sentiment preserved in federal immigration law, the United States has made admirable advances during the past two decades in the protection it affords gay immigrants. Despite this promising progress, and in contrast to the practices of all other industrialized democracies, the United States remains firm in its refusal to federally recognize any form of same‐sex partnership, a decision which bears directly on those relationships considered valid for immigration purposes. The Uniting American Families Act (UAFA) represents the closest any proposed legislation has come to successfully granting immigration rights to gay immigrants. However, through its restrictive provisions, the UAFA fails to fully account for the needs of refugees, asylees, and their same‐sex partners. This Note argues that, while the UAFA is a step in the right direction, it does not go far enough to protect gay refugees and asylees. It further proposes that legislation be enacted which provides this unique segment of the immigrant population the opportunity to share their lives together, free from fear of persecution. It advocates for the use of the conjugal partner provision set out in Canada's Immigration and Refugee Protection Act as a template for changes to U.S. immigration law, thereby expanding the category of relationships viewed as valid for the purpose of immigration.     

Legal Consciousness of Undocumented Latinos: Fear and Stigma as Barriers to Claims‐Making for First‐ and 1.5‐Generation Immigrants

This article examines the legal consciousness and incorporation experiences of undocumented immigrants in the United States. Although this population may be disaggregated along several axes, one central distinction among them is their age at migration. Those who migrated as adults live out their daily lives in different social contexts than those who migrated as children. Therefore, although all undocumented immigrants are legally banned, their identities, sense of belonging, and interpretation of their status vary. Based on ethnographic observations and in‐depth interviews of Latino undocumented immigrants from 2001 to 2010, I examine how illegality is experienced differently by social position. The findings suggest that the role of life‐stage at migration and work‐versus‐school contexts importantly inform immigrants' legal consciousness. Fear predominates in the legal consciousness of first‐generation undocumented immigrants, while the legal consciousness of the 1.5 generation is more heavily infused with stigma. Fear and stigma are both barriers to claims‐making, but they may affect undocumented immigrants' potential for collective mobilization in different ways.