Despite the adoption of the Amnesty Immigration and Reform Control Act, the Mexican Americans still encounter immense difficulties in adjusting to alien cultural, political, and social environments. In fact, the negativity on the part of the U.S. citizens is historically predetermined.
One the one hand, the existing legislature supports the legalization of foreign- born population in case they have a social security number or driver’s license. On the other hand, the presence of these conditions does not justify the unequal treatment of the Mexican Americans who are unauthorized to apply for a job in case their immigration status is illegal.
The distinction between the immigrants coming to the United States before 1982 and those who moved there in a post period does not exist in fact. Documented recognition does not provide the Mexicans with civil rights either.
Due to social, cultural, and racial distinctions, the U.S. legislature cannot be justified in terms of its prejudiced attitude toward Mexican Americans living in the country since 1980s. Certainly, residency granted for the Mexican immigrants had improved their official legal status. Nevertheless, there are still aspects that have been left unchanged in terms of treatment of the immigrated population.
According to Camacho, “To be Mexican is racial and cultural, but in the US, cultural maturity has not occurred and hence were wedged in the racial paradigm” (10). Hence, most of the laws adopted do not actually treat U.S. residents and Mexican American equally. Specific attention should be paid to the laws that permit deportation of the Chicano groups in case they committed crimes.
They can lose their residency, unlike the U.S. residents who were not affected by this law. Unlike other ethnic minorities residing in the United States, such as African American or Asian people, Mexicans were the target audience over which the strictest control has been taken.
Apparently, such an attitude was explained by deeper historic roots that these group possessed and, therefore, U.S. residents did not consider these people as immigrants or refuges.
There are also social grounds that have undermined the image of Mexican American and have created serious obstacle to their welfare. This is of particular concern to education where the prevalence of Asian and US students is presented. Hence, Camacho introduces the percentage of students in the University of California and notes, “the student population consists of Whites and Asians…which is tax payer funded” (41).
However, Mexican population has decreased by over 300 students. The status of Mexican Americans coming to the United States in 1980s should not be regarded as the ones who should adhere to the established legislature.
The newcomers arriving in America later also confronted significant challenges because they are not subject to the existing regulation and, as a result, their residency is undocumented. Unlike Africans and Asians living on the U.S. territory, this issue should be reconsidered to establish equal treatment of all minority groups.
In conclusion, it should be stressed that Mexican Americans have faced difficulties in meeting the demands of the U.S. legislature according to which the immigrants arriving in 1980s could be regarded as residents whereas those who came later could not acquire similar status.
Inconsistent policy of the U.S. states does not justify their unequal attitude toward Mexican. In contrast to Africans and Asians that gain respectable positions in American society, Mexican population suffers from social and political constraints.
Works Cited
Camacho, Julian Segura. Unwanted and Not Included: The Sage of Mexican People in the United States. US: CreateSpace, 2006. Print.