Moralizing regulation: the implications of policing “good” versus “bad” immigrants

Andrews, Abigail

doi:10.1080/01419870.2017.1375133

Cited by 37 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As years have passed, Josefina has adopted, and expects to maintain, the "good" behaviors she believes will keep her out of trouble-such as being cautious or driving carefully-noted in previous research (Andrews 2018;García 2019). At the individual level is her lack of experience with the US immigration regime's punitive arm.…”

Section: Illegibility To the Us Immigration Regime: Undocumented And mentioning

confidence: 96%

On the Radar: System Embeddedness and Latin American Immigrants' Perceived Risk of Deportation

Asad¹

2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Drawing on in‐depth interviews with 50 Latin American immigrants in Dallas, Texas, this article uncovers systematic distinctions in how immigrants holding different legal statuses perceive the threat of deportation. Undocumented immigrants recognize the precarity of their legal status, but they sometimes feel that their existence off the radar of the US immigration regime promotes their long‐term presence in the country. Meanwhile, documented immigrants perceive stability in their legal status, but they sometimes view their existence on the radar of the US immigration regime as disadvantageous to their long‐term presence in the country. The article offers the concept of system embeddedness—individuals' perceived legibility to institutions that maintain formal records—as a mechanism through which perceived visibility to the US immigration regime entails feelings of risk, and perceived invisibility feelings of safety. In this way, the punitive character of the US immigration regime can overwhelm its integrative functions, chilling immigrants out of opportunities for material and social well‐being through legalization and legal status. More broadly, system embeddedness illuminates how perceived visibility to a record‐keeping body that combines punitive and integrative goals represents a mechanism of legal stratification for subordinated populations—even absent prior punitive experiences with other social control institutions that might otherwise be thought to trigger their system avoidance.

show abstract

Section: Illegibility To the Us Immigration Regime: Undocumented And mentioning

confidence: 96%

On the Radar: System Embeddedness and Latin American Immigrants' Perceived Risk of Deportation

Asad¹

2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The news of ICE checkpoints or a general increase in immigration enforcement concerned Joseph, but the salience of that state-produced anxiety was made less salient because Joseph believed his parents were not engaged in criminal activity. Similarly, immigrants also reported feeling more secure from immigration enforcement tactics when they perform as "good immigrants" who have not committed any wrongdoings (Andrews, 2017). Understandably, even as families had this perception of safety, it did not mean that undocumented immigrants were absolutely free from deportation.…”

Section: Parental Deportabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Latino/a Citizen Children of Undocumented Parents Negotiating Illegality

Rodriguez

2018

J of Marriage and Family

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective:The objective of this study is to examine how citizen young adults with undocumented parents manage parental illegality. Background: These citizen young adults are part of mixed-status families, which consist of members with different immigration statuses and often include U.S. citizen and undocumented immigrant family members. With 16 million people in mixed-status families, scholars are beginning to capture their unique experiences, but little is known about the adult-age citizen children in these families. Method: Data for this study include interviews with 34 Latino/a citizen young adults ages 18 to 28. Interviews were analyzed by using the sociological concepts of legal violence and multigenerational punishment. Results: The findings demonstrate that young adults are somewhat shielded from parental deportation concerns because of less sustained contact with parents and because of the perception that parents are cautious. Young adults also manage illegality when they apply for federal college financial aid and navigate the possibility of sponsoring their immigrant parents for legalization. Young adults' legal access to wage labor also entails distinct responsibilities to participate in family breadwinning. Conclusion:This research demonstrates how parental undocumented status shapes family negotiations and state-produced punishments for adult citizen children previously unaccounted for in immigration and family scholarship. These findings point to the distinct challenges of citizen young adults-experiences that differ from undocumented peers, the children of lawfully present parents, and minor children in mixed-status families.

show abstract

“…Accounts of 20th‐century U.S. asylum and immigration policy document the role of foreign policy (Boyle and Busse ; Coutin ; McKinnon ; Sales ), anti‐immigration forces (Capetillo‐Ponce ; Chavez ), political culture (Gibney ; Pratt and Valverde ; Yoo ), and shared stereotypes (Flores and Schachter ; Luibhéid ; Volpp ) in forming distinctions between categories of “worthy” and “unworthy” immigrants across national, ethnic, and gendered lines. Such distinctions have an effect on immigrant behavior and identity (Andrews ; Coutin 2003; Menjívar ) and result in the reinforcement of patterns of inequality between the Western hegemony and the Third World (Bhabha ; Razack ).…”

Section: Theoretical Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reconfiguring the Deserving Refugee: Cultural Categories of Worth and the Making of Refugee Policy

Shiff¹

2020

Law Soc Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Studies on asylum give little explanatory power to the role of categories of worth in how lawmakers formulate asylum law in lack of a clear policy framework for determining eligibility for asylum status. This article contends that during periods of policy upheaval, distinctions of worth shift to forefront lawmaking: lawmakers renegotiate the moral boundaries between categories of deserving and undeserving refugees to give content in ambiguous law. In the United States, lawmakers drew on the concept of immutabilitythe notion that to be worthy of protection you must be targeted on account of traits beyond your control to change-to distinguish between "undeserving" Central Americans fleeing civil wars and gang violence, and "deserving" women subjected to gender violence. Understanding how categories of worth inform the formulation and implementation of law in periods of policy upheaval advances understandings of asylum policy and expands scholarship on the role of ideas about worth in processes of institutional change.

show abstract

Moralizing regulation: the implications of policing “good” versus “bad” immigrants

Cited by 37 publications

References 30 publications

On the Radar: System Embeddedness and Latin American Immigrants' Perceived Risk of Deportation

On the Radar: System Embeddedness and Latin American Immigrants' Perceived Risk of Deportation

Latino/a Citizen Children of Undocumented Parents Negotiating Illegality

Reconfiguring the Deserving Refugee: Cultural Categories of Worth and the Making of Refugee Policy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About