No abstract

Community colleges in the United States (US) remain relatively accessible to students from immigrant families. However, undocumented immigrant students encounter difficulties in staying continuously enrolled in community colleges because they contend with multiple disadvantages. These students often ‘stop out’, or withdraw with intentions to return. This mixed-methods study explores the non-continuous enrolment of students from immigrant families. Drawing on survey data from a randomly selected sample of community college students in California, logistic regression results indicate that although the children of immigrants exhibit an ‘immigrant advantage’ with respect to staying continuously enrolled in community college, those who remain undocumented stop out at disproportionately high rates. Through a comparative analysis of 80 semi-structured interviews with undocumented immigrants and US citizens, I outline the multidimensional ways in which a precarious legal status interferes with students' postsecondary schooling. Specifically, I suggest that undocumented students' legal status often leads them to stop out due to corresponding financial hardship, sub-standard employment options, the precarious legal status of other undocumented family members who rely on their earnings, and excessive stress. This study offers evidence that the condition of ‘illegality’ functions as a ‘master status’ that has an overpowering effect on students' college pathways.

In response to political pressure, President Obama authorized the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program in 2012, giving qualified undocumented young people access to relief from deportation, renewable work permits, and temporary Social Security numbers. This policy opened up access to new jobs, higher earnings, driver's licenses, health care, and banking. Using data from a national sample of DACA beneficiaries (N = 2,381), this article investigates variations in how undocumented young adults benefit from DACA. Our findings suggest that, at least in the short term, DACA has reduced some of the challenges that undocumented young adults must overcome to achieve economic and social incorporation. However, those with higher levels of education and access to greater family and community resources appear to have benefited the most. As such, our study provides new insights into how social policy interacts with other stratification processes to shape diverging pathways of incorporation among the general pool of undocumented immigrants.

During the early 2010s, undocumented youth activists were leading the charge to gain congressional support for the federal Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors Act, which sought to provide a pathway to citizenship for eligible undocumented youth in the United States. Led primarily by Latino college students and graduates, this movement became very attentive to and inclusive of the concerns of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer members. Drawing on semi-structured interviews of Latino lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer undocumented youth and other documentary evidence, this article demonstrates how activists can deploy intersectionality as a collective action frame that serves multiple purposes. Specifically, intersectionality can function as: (1) a diagnostic frame to help activists make sense of their own multiply-marginalized identities; (2) a motivational frame to inspire action; and (3) a prognostic frame that guides how activists build inclusive organizations and bridge social movements. We show how this frame guided the ways in which lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer and other undocumented activists interpreted their own life experiences, prompted them to build inclusive organizations, and broadened the scope of their movement. We conclude by arguing that activists have the potential to adopt intersectionality as a master frame that strengthens ties among various movements mobilizing marginalized populations.