The purpose of this study is to assess the impact of undocumented immigration on the United States, specifically the economic implications they may carry and the government effectiveness in managing this population. Utilizing the method of qualitative content analysis, this study examined the various aspects of the U.S. economy affected by this population and the nation's past and current immigration policies. The research found the undocumented population to be an expense on the host economy through their use of social and public services, with expenses even higher in the Southwest Border States. It is important to note, however, that there are benefits to providing these services. In addition amnesty-type policies were shown to be ineffective at managing the population due to various deficiencies. The nation's past experience with the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA) is a strong example. / McAnulty College and Graduate School of Liberal Arts; / Graduate Center for Social and Public Policy / MA; / Thesis;

Anti-immigrant sentiment particularly against Mexicans in the United States has had a dramatic influence on the lives of immigrants and on how they perceive the host society. Today, little research has addressed the extent to which this enmity has affected the mental-well being of immigrants. Based on 30 in-depth interviews in Houston this study investigates the degree to which nativism contributes to depression among Mexican-origin immigrant women. The findings reveal that undocumented status was salient and contributed to symptoms of depression. Additionally, my respondents revealed perceptions of intra-ethnic conflict among Mexican Americans. This thesis further explores how segmented assimilation theory can be expanded to better understand the complexities and nuances that Mexican immigrant women endure taking into consideration immigration status, racial/ethnic identity, and the structural barriers which plays a major role in their integration and mental health well-being.

September 11th 2001 led to an increase in the intensity of the already existing discourses surrounding what it means to be an American, with a particular focus on the Southern border of the United States and Mexican immigration as a perceived threat to national security. This study seeks to address the how prejudice towards undocumented Mexican immigrants generalizes to Mexican Americans. This relationship was theorized by Chavez (2008), and is what he calls the Latino threat narrative. Experimental methods will be used to measure how perceptions of Latinos differ as a function of foreignness using a 2 (positive vs. negative scenario) x 4 (Mexican American, undocumented immigrant, Latino and Anglo) X 2 (Group Process: SDO or RWA) between-subjects design. Participants were asked to read scenarios that describes a man (either Mexican American, an undocumented Mexican immigrant, a Latino or White) accidently hitting another car while parking and either leaving a note or not. The results demonstrate that when the immigration status of the man described is unknown, and he does not leave a note, participants high in Social Dominance Orientation attitudes are more likely to identify them as an undocumented Mexican immigrant. The findings of this study contribute to the literature of prejudice through further exploring the mechanisms of prejudice towards immigrant populations. / text

The present study utilizes survey data (n = 415) collected in the Migrant Border Crossing Study from repatriated Mexican migrants to examine three important questions regarding unauthorized migration attempts through southern Arizona. First, what factors explicate migrants' modes of crossing? Second, do coyote fees vary among people who rely on smuggling services to cross the border? If so, what accounts for this variation? Third, what factors shape encounters with bajadores while traversing the desert? The present analyses expand on previous studies examining the unauthorized crossing in multiple ways. For instance, I empirically test the role of a "culture of migration" in explaining modes of crossing, coyote fees, and bajador encounters. I also differentiate between two main types of coyotes: "border business" and "interior." I then examine whether crossing with a coyote mediates the risk of encountering bajadores during the journey. Overall, there are important differences in crossing modes and coyote fees. Women are more likely to travel with both coyote types, while the opposite is true for more experienced migrants. Older migrants and people who cross during summer months are less likely to travel with an "interior" coyote. The strongest predictor of higher smuggling fees is the region of a person's U.S. destination. Higher coyote fees are also associated with immigrants' higher educational attainment, being married, being the sole economic provider for one's household, and higher household income. More experienced migrants, and those crossing in larger groups or during the summer also pay higher fees, however fees do not vary by gender, age, or social capital. These findings are somewhat consistent with the extant literature on human capital and risk tolerance/aversion, but run counter to the vast migration literature emphasizing the importance of social capital in the migration process. Finally, the risk of encountering bajadores is not higher for males, young adults, the less educated, and the more impoverished, which contradicts extant findings in the victimology literature. With the exception of crossing corridor and time spent in the desert, no other factors increase the risk of encountering bandits more than traveling with a coyote. Implications and possible future research are discussed.

The thesis explores how some undocumented Latinx immigrants thrive and understand their personhood and security in the current “immigration crisis” in the U.S. Using ethnographic tools such as interviews and participant observation, I gathered undocumented Latinx immigrants’ narratives about living in Orlando, Florida. I concluded that American immigration policies use lack-of-freedom strategies to limit their experiences and rights as human beings, also as a means to deter future immigrants. Through the lens of undocumented Latinx immigrants’ stories, I analyze the relationship between freedom, power, and identity in the social hierarchy of privileges in the United States to understand how their experiences are negatively affected by intersectional issues. The COVID-19 pandemic was a breaking point that made more visible the structural inequality and vulnerability of undocumented migrants alongside other marginal populations. In this research, I expand an anthropological discussion to think through more just alternatives of life and humanizing immigration policies in the United States. I raise both anthropological and philosophical questions for addressing these social justice matters.

This thesis examines the federal government’s progression in implementing the Secure Communities program. The Secure Communities program was initiated by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in 2008 as a pilot program in only fourteen jurisdictions nation-wide. As of the writing of this thesis, four years following the initiation of the program, S-Comm. has been implemented in over 1700 jurisdictions nation-wide and it is set to be implemented in all local jurisdictions nationally by the end of 2013 (Immigration and Customs Enforcement, 2012). Although local law enforcement agencies had long shared the fingerprints of those they arrested with the FBI, the FBI now forwards this information to the DHS through S-Comm. who then checks the fingerprints against the Automated Biometric Identification System known as IDENT—a fingerprint database containing information on over 91 million individuals, including travelers, applicants for immigration benefits, and immigrants who have previously violated immigration laws. ICE then supposedly reviews their records to see if the person arrested is deportable. If they believe they are, or want to further interrogate them, ICE will issue a detainer. The detainer is a request to the local police to inform federal immigration authorities when the arrestee will be released from custody and to hold the individual for up to two days for transfer to ICE (The Chief Justice, 2011). This process is considered to be the most advanced form of file sharing between local authorities and federal immigration authorities yet. The focus of this endeavor is to evaluate whether this program has been effective in doing as its title maintains. If this program is one that the American people, documented or not, have to endure then it is important that we ask: has Secure Communities made American communities safer? Recent data collected on the program, reports of mass opposition to the initiative by local law enforcement officials throughout the country, and numerous personal accounts of discriminatory harassment of mostly Spanish-speaking Americans by federal immigration agents and state and local law enforcement officials participating in Secure Communities collectively demonstrate that this program has failed in making American communities more secure. / text

As the United States prepares to elect a new president, immigration continues to be one of the most controversial topics on the national agenda. While Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump announced his candidacy for president with the intent to build a wall along the border with Mexico, the Democratic presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton, has opted, instead to push for comprehensive immigration reform. The difference in approach is symptomatic of the divisiveness within the immigration debate. To explore this divide in depth, the dissertation’s research question is: What does the discourse on undocumented immigration in the United States in the 2000s reveal about the most salient drivers of conflict related to immigration. Using qualitative discourse analysis, the dissertation investigated coverage of the discourse on undocumented immigration in the mainstream news media, hoping to break the discourse into parts that can be examined to gain a deeper understanding of sources of conflict. Through the use of qualitative data analysis software, coding categories determined through identified sources of tension in the discourse spawned themes and topics that helped to analyze points of conflict. Through analyses of these themes, the research uncovered elements in the discourse that facilitated intergroup conflict through negative constructions of the out-group by the in-group. In order to mitigate conflict, the discourse on undocumented immigrants in the United States needs to be reconstructed in a way that untangles immigration issues from security issues and addresses the racialization and criminalization of immigration. In-depth media coverage of immigration stories with context can help facilitate a more constructive discourse.

No description available.

No description available.

Master of Arts / Department of Economics / Tracy M. Turner / The report examines the fiscal impact of undocumented persons at the federal, state, and local levels in order to explain the likely effects of an amnesty program. The report first provides background on the population of undocumented persons in the United States and an overview of the laws which govern their status. Details of past and current amnesty legislation are given. The channels through which undocumented immigrants have a fiscal impact on the three levels of government in the United States are explained. The paper discusses the economic theory relating to immigration and its effect on economic growth. Published works on the fiscal impact of the undocumented on state and local budgets and on federal programs such as social security are reviewed. The research reviewed includes an analysis of the long-term fiscal impact of immigrants. Undocumented immigrants impose a net cost at the state and local levels in most cases. However, many undocumented immigrants make income and payroll tax payments and the population of undocumented immigrants imposes a net benefit at the federal level. These sources of information are then used to explain how an amnesty program might change the fiscal impact of the undocumented at the three levels of government. The recent executive order signed by President Obama, known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), is an amnesty program that has a strong potential to help the U.S. economy retain young and highly educated workers, who have a positive fiscal impact on government finances. This report draws certain recommendations for the design of a successful amnesty and for implementing other immigration reforms from published research.