Nadia Y. Flores-Yeffal – Migration-Trust Networks: Social Cohesion in Mexican U.S.-Bound Emigration

[podcast]http://ccis.ucsd.edu/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/DW_C00701.mp3[/podcast]

Seminar to be held on Tuesday, June 5th in ERC 115 at 12:30 pm

In this research, Professor Nadia Y. Flores-Yeffal uses ethnographic longitudinal data collected in the state of Guanajuato, Mexico as well as the U.S. to introduce the concept of Migration-Trust Networks (MTN) from a transnational perspective. The concept contributes to the existing social capital theories of international migration by defining the particularities that characterize the social networks of migration in which a large number of migrants from Mexico to the U.S. lack legal documentation. She specifies membership requirements to participate in a MTN for those who migrate from rural and urban places of origin. Religion, paisanaje, bounded solidarity, and enforceable trust are among the social mechanisms that influence the behavior of network participants to act collectively, trust one another, and offer mutual support in the challenges of migration. Assisting fellow migrants is expected of MTN members, while reciprocating the assistance is not. Instead, a form of risk pooling occurs in which migrants “return” favors by helping future migrants. The social structure of a MTN and the dependency on relationships of trust among its members allow for collective efficacy to form and serve as a safe haven for those who lack legal documents. Social expectations and social monitoring are maintained in the transnational context using modern technology such as cell phones and the internet. Flores-Yeffal provides a theoretical and empirical proposition of how and why the Migration-Trust Networks are able to expand by absorbing new members in a process she calls “the MTN effect.” She also argues that micro and macro social forces function simultaneously in the transnational context in order to develop, expand and/or transplant Migration-Trust Networks.

Nadia Y. Flores-Yeffal is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Sociology at Texas A&M University. She received her B.A. in Social Science from University of California Irvine, her M.A. in Demography and Ph.D. in Sociology from University of Pennsylvania. Her primary research interests include social capital, segregation, and transnational ties among Latin-American immigrants in the U.S., the role of modern technology in spreading anti-immigrant sentiment in the U.S., as well as the upward mobility of Latinos in the United States. Her research has been supported through her affiliation with the Mexican Migration Project and the Latin-American Migration Project at Princeton University, by the Mellon Foundation, “Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología” (CONACYT), and by the Mexican American and U.S. Latino Research Center at Texas A&M University. Her first book, entitled Migration-Trust Networks: social cohesion in Mexican-U.S. bound emigration, is being published by Texas A&M University Press. She is also currently writing her second book on international migration from El Salvador.

 

Michael Hiscox – The IMPALA Database Project

[podcast]http://ccis.ucsd.edu/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Michael-Hiscox1.mp3[/podcast]

Seminar to be held on Thursday, May 31st in ERC 115 at 12:30 pm.

Governments adopt a variety of approaches to regulating immigration, and make adjustments to these policies frequently. But currently there exist no comprehensive, cross-nationally comparable data on immigration laws and policies and how they have changed over time. This is a major problem for ongoing research on the determinants and impacts of immigration policies. The project is aimed at addressing this problem by compiling and analyzing comparable data on immigration laws and policies in 26 major recipient countries from 1960 until the present, with annual updates to follow.  The project is examining major categories of immigration law and policy, covering the acquisition of citizenship, economic migration, family reunification, asylum and refugee protection, students, and policies relating to undocumented migration and border control. It will also collect data on policies relating to the integration of immigrants into the host country, including government programs providing assistance and language training. Regulations are coded for each country annually to generate comparable measures along key dimensions, including indexes of the restrictiveness of each country’s laws and policies relating to acquisition of citizenship, economic migration, treatment of asylum seekers and refugees, and border control, and measures of the extent to which regulations favor particular categories of immigrants based upon occupational skills, education, ethnicity, and gender.

Michael J. Hiscox is the Clarence Dillon Professor of International Affairs in the Department of Government in the Faculty of Arts and Sciences at Harvard University. He is also a faculty associate at the Institute for Quantitative Social Science, the Weatherhead Center for International Affairs, and the Harvard University Center for the Environment, and co-leader of the Harvard-MIT Private Governance Research Group. His research focuses on international trade, foreign investment, immigration, development, government accountability, and private sector initiatives and standards for addressing social and environmental issues in global supply chains.


Robbie Totten – Security and United States Immigration Policy

[podcast]http://ccis.ucsd.edu/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Robbie_Totten.mp3[/podcast]

Seminar to be held on Tuesday, May 8th in ERC 115 at 12:30 pm.

What is the relationship between security and immigration to the U.S? How have security objectives factored into U.S. immigration policy? These questions are significant for the U.S. because the volume of international migration has been increasing in recent decades and many analysts argue that without sound policy planning immigration can for America serve as a source of conflict with foreign states, tax the ability of its domestic systems to assimilate diverse peoples without violence, and expose its citizens and immigrants to crime, contagious disease, and terrorism. This talk will address these questions and present the strategic logic for U.S. immigration policy by identifying three general categories of security objectives that American officials have attempted to reach with immigration from the colonial era to the present-day: (1) foreign relations, (2) material and military interests, and (3) domestic security (prevent crime, espionage, and terrorism; epidemics; and ethnic violence). The discussions of the categories will draw from International Relations (IR) and Security Studies theories, primary sources, and works by demographers and historians to specify the relationships amongst the security areas and immigration, identify policy instruments used by leaders to influence immigration for security, and present historical cases of U.S. immigration policies designed for security purposes. The talk will conclude with discussing its implications for immigration research and contemporary policy.

Robbie Totten is a doctoral candidate in the UCLA Department of Political Science and the pre-doctoral fellow here at the CCIS. He received his BA in Political Science from Duke University and he has published articles in the Journal of Interdisciplinary History and Diplomatic History. Totten’s dissertation is titled, “Security and United States Immigration Policy,” and his research interests include, demography and security, foreign relations and state migration policies, nontraditional security threats, geopolitics and international migration, refugee crises, and U.S. immigration policy history.


Research Seminar with Patrick Ettinger & Kelly Lytle Hernandez

[podcast]http://ccis.ucsd.edu/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Ettinger_Hernandez.mp3[/podcast]

Seminar to be held on Tuesday, February 21st in ERC 115 at 12:30 pm.

“`Something there is that doesn’t love a wall’:  Late Nineteenth-Century Border Crossings and the Imperatives of American Border Control”

Federal laws restricting the entry of certain migrants into the United States, initially imposed in the late nineteenth century, unsurprisingly occasioned the first efforts to evade those restrictions.  Among other responses, smugglers and immigrants from around the globe began to make use of routes into the United States that crossed the Canadian and Mexican borders.  American officials responded by attempting to institute border-crossing regulations and border guards.  This, of course, meant determining what exactly an effective border would look like.  This talk considers the visions of proper border enforcement that developed among American immigration officials, policy makers, and the media in the decades before the creation of the U.S. Border Patrol in 1924.

Dr. Patrick Ettinger grew up in southern California and studied in the Great Books Program at the University of Notre Dame, graduating with a B.A. in 1986.  He earned his PhD in History from Indiana University in 2000, where his dissertation research focused on undocumented immigration and early border enforcement efforts on the Canadian and Mexican borders at the turn of the 20th century.  He has given various professional papers and published excerpts from his research in the Western Historical Quarterly. His book, Imaginary Lines:  Border Enforcement and the Origins of Undocumented Immigration, was published by the University of Texas Press in 2009 and named a finalist for the William P. Clements Prize for the Best Non-Fiction Book on Southwestern America.  Currently, he is Professor of History at Sacramento State University, where he regularly teaches courses in American immigration history, the history of the American West, and oral history.  He also serves as the director of his department’s Public History Master’s Program.

“Migra! A History of the US Border Patrol”

Migra! chronicles the untold history of the United States Border Patrol from its beginnings in 1924 as a small peripheral outfit to its emergence as a large professional police force. It is based upon a gold mine of lost and unseen records stored in garages, closets, an abandoned factory, and in U.S. and Mexican archives. Focusing on the daily challenges of policing the borderlands and bringing to light unexpected partners and forgotten dynamics, Migra! reveals how the U.S. Border Patrol translated the mandate for

Kelly Lytle Hernandez is associate professor in the UCLA Department of History and Associate Co-Director of the National Center for History in the Schools. Her research interests are in twentieth-century U.S. history with a concentration upon race, migration, and police and prison systems in the American West and U.S.-Mexico borderlands. Her new book, MIGRA! A History of the U.S. Border Patrol (University of California Press, 2010) is the first book to tell the story of how and why the U.S. Border Patrol concentrates its resources upon policing unsanctioned Mexican immigration despite the many possible targets and strategies of U.S. migration control. Her current research focuses upon exploring the social world of incarceration in Los Angeles between 1876 and 1965.

* Light refreshments will be provided

Jane Junn – How to Study Public Opinion in a Diverse Polity: Political Attitudes on Immigration in the U.S.

[podcast]http://ccis.ucsd.edu/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Jane-Junn.mp3[/podcast]

Seminar to be held on Tuesday, February 7th in ERC 115 at 12:30 pm.

The study of the contours and antecedents of U.S. public opinion on immigration has been characterized by several strategies: 1) analyzing differences between whites and African Americans only; 2) controlling for race when estimating inferential models by using dummy variables; 3) utilizing models of white opinion to explain attitudes among minority Americans; and 4) analyzing one racial or ethnic group in isolation. Professor Junn argues that these approaches are insufficient to both the descriptive and inferential task facing analysts of public opinion in a diverse American polity. Instead, she advocates a comparative relational approach that considers the opinions of all Americans, and generates hypotheses based on the interactive and historically-grounded experiences of racial groups in the United States. With this approach, she develops a theory of the political context of racial structural positionality and articulate how this context and the development of racialization structures agency  and constraint for Americans classified by race.

Jane Junn is Professor of Political Science at the University of Southern California. She is the author of four books on political participation in the U.S. Her first book, Education and Democratic Citizenship in America (with Norman Nie and Ken Stehlik-Barry, University of Chicago Press, 1996), won the Woodrow Wilson Foundation award from the American Political Science Association for the best book published in political science. She is also the author of Civic Education: What Makes Students Learn (with Richard G. Niemi, Yale University Press, 1998), New Race Politics: Understanding Minority and Immigrant Politics (edited with Kerry L. Haynie, Cambridge University Press, 2008), and Asian American Political Participation: Emerging Constituents and their Political Identities (with Janelle Wong, Karthick Ramakrishnan and Taeku Lee, Russell Sage Foundation, 2011). This most recent book is based on data from the 2008 National Asian American Survey. She is currently at work with Natalie Masuoka on a book on political attitudes in the U.S. entitled Conditional Welcome: Public Opinion on Immigration and the Politics of Belonging.

Jane has been Vice President of the American Political Science Association, a Fulbright Senior Scholar and a recipient of an Outstanding Teacher Award from Columbia University Teachers College. She was a member of the Social Science Research Council National Research Commission on Elections and Voting and a member of the National Academy of Science Committee on the U.S. Naturalization Test Redesign. She was the director of the USC – Los Angeles Times Poll during the 2010 California election.

* Light refreshments will be provided

Erik Bleich – The Freedom to Be Racist? How the United States and Europe Struggle to Preserve Freedom and Combat Racism

Seminar to be held on Thursday, January 26th in ERC 201 at 12:30 pm.

We love freedom. We hate racism. But what do we do when these values collide? This talk, based on the speaker’s 2011 book of the same title, advances descriptive, explanatory, and normative arguments. It explores policies that the United States, Britain, France, Germany, and other liberal democracies have implemented when forced to choose between preserving freedom and combating racism. Using a comparative historical approach, it reveals that while most liberal democracies have increased restrictions on racist speech, groups, and actions since the end of World War II, this trend has resembled a slow creep more than a slippery slope. Outcomes have varied across time and place, however, and have been less the product of differences in minority mobilization, constitutional law, or culture, than of conjunctures of factors in particular political contexts. From a normative standpoint, it develops a framework for evaluating the extent to which policy responses are proportionate to the level of harm the racism inflicts. It also asserts that the best way for societies to preserve freedom while fighting racism is through processes of public deliberation that involve citizens in decisions that impact the core values of liberal democracies.

Erik Bleich is professor of political science at Middlebury College in Vermont. His most recent book is The Freedom to Be Racist? How the United States and Europe Struggle to Preserve Freedom and Combat Racism (Oxford University Press, 2011). He is also the author of Race Politics in Britain and France: Ideas and Policymaking since the 1960s (Cambridge University Press, 2003), the editor of Muslims and the State in the Post-9/11 West (Routledge, 2010), and the author of articles on race, ethnicity, and policymaking in liberal democracies that have appeared in journals such as Comparative Political Studies, Comparative Politics, the European Political Science Review, Theory & Society, and World Politics.

* Light refreshments will be provided

Claire Adida – Immigrant Exclusion in Africa

[podcast]http://ccis.ucsd.edu/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Claire-Adida.mp3[/podcast]

Seminar to be held on Tuesday, January 10th in ERC 115 at 12:30 pm.

What explains immigrant exclusion in urban West Africa? Africa scholars have long recognized the dynamic and political nature of citizenship in Africa. Immigration scholars have long debated the determinants of immigrant exclusion in industrialized democracies. But we know very little about the character of immigrant exclusion in Africa. This research contributes to our understanding of immigrant insecurity in the developing world by comparing and explaining the fates of two immigrant ethnic groups – the Nigerian Yorubas and Hausas – in three West African cities: Accra, Cotonou and Niamey. Relying on surveys of immigrants and their host populations, as well as interviews with local community leaders, it finds that, in environments lacking a formal-legal path to citizenship, the immigrant experience is shaped by local actors who benefit from immigrant insecurity and vulnerability. Consequently, cultural similarities between immigrants and hosts do not necessarily improve immigrant integration; they may, in fact, exacerbate exclusion.

Claire Adida is an assistant professor in the department of Political Science at the University of California, San Diego. She received her Ph.D. in political science from Stanford University in 2010. Her research is in Comparative Politics, and more specifically in the study of ethnicity and identity, government and non-state provision of public goods, inter-group cooperation and violence, and trust and informal institutions. Her work has been published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences and in Comparative Political Studies. She is completing a book manuscript on Immigrant Exclusion and Insecurity in Africa, where she offers one of the first systematic analyses of the immigrant experience in a region that experiences large flows of voluntary migration.

* Light refreshments will be provided

Jeffrey Lesser – Brazilian Journeys: Contemporary Immigration and Emigration

[podcast]http://ccis.ucsd.edu/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Jeffrey_Lesser.mp3[/podcast]

Seminar to be held on Monday, October 10th in ERC 115 at 12:00 pm.

Brazil, like the United States, often defines itself as a “nation of immigrants.”  Yet immigration has implications far beyond the direct experiences of newcomers.  The idea of immigration, often so different than the concrete reality of arrival, allowed Brazil’s elites (made up of landowners, politicians, intellectuals, and industrialists) to see a future that was different and better than the present one.

More than five million immigrants flowed into Brazil between 1872 and 1972 and the majority originated in Europe, especially Italy. Yet Brazil stands out for the high numbers of non-Europeans who also entered, notably from Japan and the Middle East.   Today Brazil’s largest city, São Paulo, is one of the largest Italian, Japanese, and Lebanese cities in the world.

This paper will explore the relationship between immigration and national identity both as an historical phenomenon and as a contemporary one by providing an overview of immigration to Brazil and then focusing on the contemporary movement of Brazilians to Japan.

Jeffrey Lesser is Samuel Candler Dobbs Professor and Chair of the History Department at Emory University.  His research focuses on issues of ethnicity and national identity.

Lesser received his B.A. and M.A. degrees from Brown University and his Ph.D. from New York University.  He is the author of A Discontented Diaspora: Japanese-Brazilians and the Meanings of Ethnic Militancy, 1960-1980 (Durham: Duke University Press, 2007), winner of the Roberto Reis Prize (Honorable Mention) from the Brazilian Studies Association; Negotiating National Identity: Minorities, Immigrants and the Struggle for Ethnicity in Brazil (Duke University Press, 1999), winner of the Best Book Prize from the Brazil Section of the Latin American Studies Association, and Welcoming the Undesirables: Brazil and the Jewish Question (University of California Press, 1994) which won the Best Book Prize from New England Council on Latin American Studies. 

Lesser is has edited a number of volumes including Rethinking Jewish-Latin Americans (University of New Mexico Press, 2008; with Raanan Rein) Searching for Home Abroad: Japanese – Brazilians and Transnationalism (Duke University Press, 2003) and Arab and Jewish Immigrants in Latin America: Images and Realities (London: Frank Cass, 1998; with Ignacio Klich).

Ruben J. Garcia – Labor’s Approach to Immigration: How Does Law Matter?

[podcast]http://ccis.ucsd.edu/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/Ruben_Garcia.mp3[/podcast]

Labor’s Approach to Immigration: How Does Law Matter?

Seminar to be held in ERC 115 at 2:00 pm.
While many U.S. and Canadian unions historically marginalized immigrant workers, by the early 1990s, key unions achieved success organizing immigrant workers and adopted more progressive immigration policies. North America’s major labor federations also made significant changes. The Canadian Labour Congress created a National Anti-Racism Task Force in 1994 to address, among other issues, the links between racism and Canadian immigration policies. In 2000, the AFL-CIO reversed its previous support for legislation that contributed to the discrimination and intimidation of immigrants. Then in 2003, a coalition of major U.S. unions, NGOs and community groups organized the Immigrant Workers Freedom Ride to call attention to the rights of immigrants.

This paper argues that shifts in union immigration policies emerge not only out of demographic changes that generate the need to organize immigrant workers, but also reflect larger changes wrought by processes of economic integration. It also suggests that unions’ adoption of less draconian immigration policies provide new political arenas for transnational labor collaboration. A 1997 campaign conducted by the Teamsters, UFW, and Mexican labor activists to defend the rights of migrant farmworkers who had left their community in Mexico to work in the Washington apple industry provides one example. Another example is advocacy in favor of labor rights for undocumented workers by the AFL-CIO and affiliated unions in court cases. We believe these and other examples will show that transnational links and amicus advocacy led official federation policy on immigration reform. These examples show how social change occurs in large, diffuse organizations.

Ruben J. Garcia is Professor of Law at California Western School of Law in San Diego, where he has taught since 2003. He has held visiting appointments at the University of California, Davis School of Law and at the University of California, San Diego. Professor Garcia received an A.B. from Stanford University, a J.D. from UCLA School of Law, and an LL.M. from the University of Wisconsin Law School.  His research and teaching focus on the ways that race, gender, immigration and globalization impact the law of work. Professor Garcia’s scholarly work has appeared in a number of publications, including the University of Chicago Legal Forum, Hastings Law Journal, Florida State Law Review, Florida Law Review, the University of Pennsylvania Journal of Labor and Employment Law, the First Amendment Law Review, and the Journal of Gender, Race and Justice. He is currently finishing a book for New York University Press, titled Marginal Workers: How Legal Fault Lines Divide Workers and Leave Them Without Protection (2011).

Amada Armenta — Policing Immigrants or Immigration? The Implementation of 287(g) in Nashville

[podcast]http://ccis.ucsd.edu/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Amada_Armenta.mp3[/podcast]

Seminar to be held in ERC 115 at 2:00 pm.
Amada Armenta will discuss her research on the implementation of the 287(g) program in Nashville, Tennessee. In April 2007, the Davidson County Sheriff’s Office began implementing the 287(g) program, which allows trained Sheriff’s deputies to screen all foreign born arrestees for immigration status and process them for removal. This particular paper focuses on how (or if) the adoption of the 287(g) program in Davidson County, affects the daily practices of city police officers whose arrests subject immigrants to screening in the jail, but who do not have immigration enforcement authority. Based on ride-alongs and interviews with Nashville police officers, Armenta’s research examines how field-level officers decide whether to arrest immigrants on misdemeanor violations to state law. Her findings show how officer behavior motivated by formal and de facto police department policies, create the perception that police are targeting immigrants for enforcement.

Amada Armenta is a doctoral candidate in the Department of Sociology at UCLA and a Predoctoral Research Fellow at the Center for Comparative Immigration Studies at UC San Diego. Her research has been supported by various organizations including the National Science Foundation, the American Society of Criminology, the American Sociological Association, the Social Science Research Council, and the Center for Comparative Immigration Studies. She has presented professional papers at numerous national conferences, and has been published in International Migration Review, Qualitative Sociology, and Work and Occupations. Her current research focuses on the politics and implementation of the 287(g) program in Nashville, Tennessee.