IMMIGRANTS AND REFUGEES IN CONTEMPORARY AMERICAN SOCIETY.pdf
1. IMMIGRANTS AND REFUGEES IN CONTEMPORARY AMERICAN SOCIETY
IMMIGRANTS AND REFUGEES IN CONTEMPORARY AMERICAN SOCIETY ON
IMMIGRANTS AND REFUGEES IN CONTEMPORARY AMERICAN SOCIETY I attached the
paper guidelines that specifically states what the paper is about and how it should be done.
The same document includes that rubric. I need this paper done by Tuesday night please I
also attached the articles associated with the paper.SOC 555: Paper guidelines for section
papers: 1) Papers must incorporate all material for the particular section (eg first paper:
Massey, Rodriguez, Lubheid, Douglas, Tell Me How it Ends, The Visitor). You must refer to
the authors in your text or include parenthetical citations. You can also include material
from class discussion and presentations. Generally, do not use outside sources, if you do
please include a bibliography with references for outside sources only. 2) Papers should be
3-4 pages, 12 point font, 1 inch margins, double spaced. 3) Do not summarize each source.
Instead integrate the material by choosing arguments or themes that connect different
sources and by organizing your paper (your paragraphs) around these ideas. IMMIGRANTS
AND REFUGEES IN CONTEMPORARY AMERICAN SOCIETYDo not have each paragraph be
about one source. 4) This is an essay. The arguments of the different paragraphs should be
connected into an overall argument (thesis) that is stated in the introduction. 5) The paper
will be graded on: a. Content – demonstration of understanding of concepts from material –
there are no tests in this class, papers are where you show that you have learned concepts.
b. Incorporation of all sources from section c. Strength of argumentation and use of
evidence from sources to arguments d. Structure (topic sentences, cohesion of paragraph,
organization, flow) e. IMMIGRANTS AND REFUGEES IN CONTEMPORARY AMERICAN
SOCIETYEditing (attention to grammar, spelling, etc.) Assistance: SDSU Writing Center will
do a tutoring session on assignment. Make an appointment at:
http://writingcenter.sdsu.edu/appointment.html My regular office hours: Wednesdays
2:15-3:15 and Thursdays 2-3 Plagiarism: Generally, describing the author’s ideas,
arguments and examples in your own words with a reference to that author shows your
understanding better than simply quoting. If you do use the author’s words, you must use
quotation marks and cite the pae number. Using the authors’ words as your own is
plagiarism and will result in no credit for the paper. Late papers: papers that are not turned
in at the beginning of the class period when they are due will receive one full grade
deduction for every 24 hours. So, a paper turned in after class up until 4pm the following
day receives the same deduction as handing it in late during class. Please bring a hard copy,
but if you have printing issues, email a copy to make sure it meets the deadline.
3. regarding immigrant demographics dominates political and social discourse on
immigration. More important, the politics of immigration have been imbued with racial
meaning. Indeed, prior to the Civil Rights era, legislators overtly worked to preserve the
racial status quo through the formation of immigration policies. Policy makers were explicit
in their language and intent as they excluded and minimized migration opportunities for the
racialized other. Immigrants such as Asians, Jews, Poles, Italians, Slavs, and Irish, were
affected by these actions. These immigrants were widely identified as racially inferior and
linked to criminality, poverty, and disease.These racist notions guided immigration
legislation for most of the 20th century. In the post–Civil Rights era, many minimize the
impact of race in immigration debates, but racism has not disappeared. Despite major
transformations in the United States over the last century, the immigration tropes seem
remarkably the same. However, there is one critical difference from a century ago that is of
particular importance for this article: the racial language that once characterized
immigration issues has largely disappeared. Yet it is our contention that race is still very
much a part of the immigration landscape. In the post–Civil Rights era, overtly racist
language has been replaced by racial euphemisms that serve in their stead. Words like
“immigrant,” “illegal immigrant,” and “undocumented immigrant” operate as racialized
proxies for immigrants of color, particularly Mexicans and more generally Latinos. The
disappearance of racist language is a relatively new development for throughout much of
our history, the United States has not been shy about proclaiming White racial
superiority.In fact, the United States has had explicitly color-coded immigration laws that
designated only Whites (and later Blacks) as eligible for citizenship. Today, however, we
have entered a new era in race relations—one that is more “sophisticated” and “subtle” but
nonetheless still as effective as Jim Crow in “maintaining the status quo” (Bonilla-Silva,
2014, p. 25): the era of color blindness. Color-blind racism provides a critical perspective
for understanding the enduring role of race in immigration practices in the post–Civil Rights
era. This article aims to illustrate this enduring reality within immigration policies and
practices utilizing the color-blind perspective. In particular, we argue that immigration
policies serve as a crucial mechanism in the maintenance and reproduction of both color-
blind racism and structural racial inequality.We begin with an overview of the key tenets of
Bonilla-Silva’s color-blind racism. We then examine immigration policies and practices
during the era of explicit racialization and then contrast this with the more subtle
employment of racialization today. The bulk of our work is devoted to illustrating the color-
blind mechanisms employed in the contemporary era. As the Supreme Court has affirmed
the power of Congress to govern all areas of immigration, immigration debates among
lawmakers are a most appropriate forum for analyzing the discourse in immigration
debates and will serve as the primary data source for our analysis. Specifically, we select for
analysis the statements on immigration of politicians, including key legislators, who
introduced immigration legislation to Congress. We conclude with a discussion of the
racialized impact of immigration policies and the difficulties in grappling with these issues
in a racially stratified society reluctant to acknowledge it.Douglas et al. 1431 Eduardo
Bonilla-Silva and Color-Blind Racism For many Americans, the historical signing of the 1964
Civil Rights Act signaled an end to the racial struggles experienced by people of color.
4. Indeed, the signing of the Act by President Lyndon B. Johnson attested to many people that
the racism experienced by people of color during the Jim Crow Era was over; segregation,
discrimination, and other racist acts were believed things of the past. The idea that racial
discrimination is an anachronism remains embedded in our national consciousness.
Nonetheless, critical race scholars challenge this proclamation through evidence
demonstrating the persistence of systemic racism (Feagin, 2006). The United States
operates along racialized social systems where racial categories are created, maintained,
and used to place people along economic, political, social, and ideological hierarchies
(Bonilla-Silva, 2014; Feagin, 2006). Bonilla-Silva (2014, p. 8) notes that the social
construction of race and the meaning associated with the hierarchical positioning of people
produce a “social reality” for individuals who are racialized along systemically unequal
positions based on White supremacy.Furthermore, racist ideas and actions based on the
notion of White supremacy are no longer problematized in the same way as they were prior
to Civil Rights. The prevailing ideology in the United States after the Civil Rights era holds
that race no longer matters (BonillaSilva, 2014). In this context, the reality of White
supremacy and racial dominance remains hidden or misrepresented. It is our contention
that White supremacy remains at the core of immigration policies and practices. The use of
color-blind racism allows people, particularly Whites, to explain racial inequalities through
the use of nonracial factors. As such, Whites absolve themselves from critically examining
their relationship to the experiences and realities of people of color (Bonilla-Silva, 2014).
Accordingly, Bonilla-Silva (2014) suggests that Whites rationalize and frame racial
inequalities in various ways: through cultural deficiencies within communities of color,
through the use of what are considered to be natural tendencies, or market dynamics. In
sum, Bonilla-Silva (2014) argues that we are living in a time of “racism without racists.” This
new racial ideology works through the use of four central frames that filter information
regarding racial phenomenon.These frames are abstract liberalism, naturalization, cultural
racism, and minimization of racism (Bonilla-Silva, 2014). Central to the abstract liberalism
frame is its association with political and economic liberalism. Abstract liberalism allows
Whites to oppose “almost all practical approaches” to dealing with racial inequality by
having these oppositions appear as though they are “reasonable” and “moral” (Bonilla-Silva,
2014, p. 76). This occurs in situations where White privilege is defended by the myth of
meritocracy or in the name of equality. The naturalization frame explains racial matters as a
consequence of natural occurrences or tendencies. Thus, racially motivated inequalities, like
residential segregation, are normalized as people simply wanting to “live among their own
kind” instead of as a product of racist structures.The cultural racism frame utilizes cultural
arguments to minimize racist patterns. Whites utilize this frame to argue that the racial
inequalities experienced by people of color are due to a lack of morals, values, 1432
American Behavioral Scientist 59(11) efforts, or pathologies within communities of color
(Bonilla-Silva, 2014). For example, the pathology of the Black family is linked to “blacks
have too many babies” or to a culture of poverty and welfare dependence thereby
rationalizing enduring racial inequality (Bonilla-Silva, 2014, p. 76). The minimization of
racism is the fourth frame in Bonilla-Silva’s color-blind paradigm. This frame is used to
posit that discriminatory acts no longer affect the life chances of people of color. Hence, in
5. contemporary times, racial inequalities are minimized as “not being as bad as they were
back then (before Civil Rights legislation)” or people of color overreacting or being overly
sensitive to racial matters (Bonilla-Silva, 2014). Color-blind ideology provides a critical
understanding of the realities experienced by racial minorities. As we turn to contemporary
issues of immigration, we see that these frames are used in many ways to dehumanize and
criminalize immigrants in the United States, especially immigrants of color. Indeed, the
paradox of U.S. immigration is that while the country is recognized and celebrated as a
nation of immigrants, its policies and the everyday lived realities of immigrants are
dominated by the dynamics of White supremacy. To assess the usefulness of Bonilla-Silva’s
thesis on “colorblindness,” we analyze the immigration discourse of U.S. political leaders.
Given the Supreme Court’s continued affirmation of the power of Congress on matters of
immigration, this is an appropriate source of discourse data on immigration.C-Span videos
of U.S. House and Senate sessions provide much of the data analyzed below. Other sources
include statements of sitting presidents on signing legislation into law and other statements
found in newspaper coverage of immigration issues and legislation. Table 1 summarizes the
data used in our analyses and provides a brief synopsis of the significance of the source.
Immigration Policies and Practices During the Explicitly Racial Era For most of U.S. history,
racially coded immigration and naturalization laws prescribed the race and national origin
of the country’s inhabitants. The science of eugenics affirmed the racial superiority of the
nation’s initial immigrants originating from northern and western Europe, and was
foundational to the construction of immigration and naturalization laws hereafter. U.S.
citizenship was definitely a Whites-only privilege inscribed as such in 1790. Eventually, the
United States extended citizenship to racial and ethnic groups that had originally been
incorporated to the country outside the traditional route of voluntary immigration.The 14th
amendment enacted in 1868 extended citizenship to people formerly enslaved following the
Civil War. Other groups were granted U.S. citizenship through the backdoor as they were
neither Black nor White, including Mexicans who came with Texas when the United States
granted it statehood and later others who came with acquisition of Mexico’s territory on the
signing of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in 1848; Puerto Ricans who came as part of the
Puerto Rico commonwealth and the signing of the Paris Treaty in 1898 following the U.S.–
Spanish War; and Native Americans whose land the United States usurped. Asians and 1433
7. Harry Reid 6. Edward Kennedy 5. Ronald Reagan 4. Alan Simpson U.S. Senator—Nevada
Democrat Senate Majority Leader 40th U.S. President Republican U.S. Senator—
Massachusetts Democrat 38th U.S. President Republican U.S. Senator— Wyoming
Republican 3. Gerald Ford 2. Joshua Eilberg 36th U.S. President Democrat U.S.
Representative— Pennsylvania Democrat Status 1. Lyndon B. Johnson Who Table 1.
Immigration Discourse Sources. Cosponsor (Simpson) of S 358—the Immigration Act of
1990 July 11, 1989, Opening Senate debate on S 358 after bill came out of committee S.
1351—Immigration Stabilization Act of 1993 Early federal response to events in California
and illegal immigration 1976 Amendment to the 1965 Immigration Act signing statement
Cosponsor (with Mazzoli) of 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) Excerpts
from Senator Simpson before the U.S. Senate introducing the IRCA of 1983 1986 IRCA
signing statement Sponsor of 1976 Amendment to the 1965 Immigration Act Eilberg
6. statement on bill signing 1965 Immigration Act signing ceremony Event/legislation
(continued) https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/103/s1351:
http://www.reagan.utexas.edu/archives/ speeches/1986/110686b.htm CSPAN—
http://www.c-span.org/video/?8396-1/ senate-session Labor Law Journal LBJ Library;
http://www.lbjlib.utexas.edu/Johnson/ archives.hom/speeches.hom/651003.asp
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/94/ hr14535#overeview Shabecoff, Philip. “Ford
Signs Immigration Bill Aiding Residents of Western Hemisphere,” New York Times, October
24, 1976. p. 26 & October 31, 1976—New York Times Corrections.
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=6495 Source 1434 9. Ted Poe 8. Buck McKeon
Who Table 1. IMMIGRANTS AND REFUGEES IN CONTEMPORARY AMERICAN
SOCIETY(continued) Republican U.S. Representative— Texas Republican U.S.
Representative— California Status First speaker in of H.R. 2202 (sponsored by Lamar
Smith, Representative from Texas)—Immigration Control and Financial Responsibility Act
(the bill was retitled to Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of
1996) Bill passed House and Senate. Conference Report reconciling differences between
House and Senate versions accepted by the House; Senate scheduled a vote for cloture;
however, agreed on components of the bill were incorporated into H.R. 3610, the 1997
Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act (sponsored by C.W. Young) and signed by
President Clinton on September 30, 1996 H.R. 5272—To prohibit certain actions with
respect to deferred action for aliens (DACA) not lawfully present in the United States
(Introduced 7/30/14 by Marsha Blackburn, Republican Representative from Tennessee;
passed by House) Poe speaking in of the bill Event/legislation Congressional Record:
https://www.congress.gov/ crec/2014/08/01/CREC-2014-08-01.pdf Page H7232 C-SPAN:
http://www.c-span.org/video/?320818-6/ house-debate-immigrant-deportation time:
32:03 http://www.c-span.org/video/?75436-1/illegalimmigration-debate Source Douglas
et al. 1435 Latinos migrating to the United States toward the end of the 19th and beginning
of the 20th century also sought citizenship. While ineligible according to U.S. law, they did
take their appeals to U.S. courts most claiming to be White. López (1996) provides an
overview of these court cases and the contradict
