Abstract
Structural racism is a social issue that should not be involved in the United States immigration policy because it is an open sign of injustice and demonstrates weaknesses of the immigration system. This work analyzes structural racism from the view of a social issue that occurs in the U. S. immigration system. The purpose of this research is to investigate how the U. S. immigration policy manifests structural racism against different immigrants based on their race and origin. For that purpose, several corresponding studies were investigated and analyzed. The results of this research have revealed certain imperfections in the U. S. immigration policy that cause structural racism inside the system. These imperfections are to be eliminated to improve the immigration policy and avoid structural racism.
Introduction
Immigration policy in the U. S. is a problem of current interest as immigrants nowadays experience many difficulties because of their status. The U. S. immigration system is highly complex and contains various conditions that complicate the situation. That directly applies to immigrants of color and people who migrate from Asian countries, Africa, and Latin America. That is why the U. S. immigration policy is strongly correlated with different aspects of structural racism. This topic is highly debatable and controversial, and much research has been done on the matter, illustrating other points of view, suggesting various approaches to the problem, and seeking new solutions. However, many questions of this topic remain open and require further exploration. To this end, several studies relating to the matter were investigated to accumulate the existing data and make conclusions. Structural racism is a social issue that should not be involved in the United States immigration policy because it is an open sign of injustice and demonstrates weaknesses of the immigration system.
Changes in the U. S. immigration policy during Trump’s presidency
Much has changed in the U. S. immigration policy during Trump’s presidency. For instance, Pierce et al. report that politicians have characterized immigration as a highly positive phenomenon for the country and its heritage (2). Now, immigration is framed as a crucial threat to the United States’ security and employment (Pierce et al. 2). That has led to global changes in the policymakers’ view of the immigration policy and its goals. Moreover, this topic is currently under active discussion, and the opinions on the matter are wildly divergent. That may create breaches in the immigration policy and cause social instability that could endanger the status of immigrants and even negatively affect the lives of the nationals.
The beginning of Trump’s presidency is associated with several measures taken straight away regarding the immigration policy, bringing broad changes to it. These include building a wall across the entire Southern border, hiring 15000 additional interior and border enforcement officers, and eliminating “sanctuary cities” (Pierce et al. 3). Such cities refuse proactive cooperation with enforcement officers of U. S. immigration to arrest unauthorized immigrants (Pierce et al. 3). These measures seem highly radical and hardboiled since such pressure on immigrants does not appear adequately justified.
However, the immigration policy had been problematic before Trump’s presidency, as well. The main act regarding the procedure under discussion was signed by President William J. Clinton in 1996 and was called the “Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act,” or IIRIRA for short (Kerwin 192). The president stated that this act strengthened “the rule of law by cracking down on illegal immigration at the border, in the workplace, and in the criminal justice system” (qtd. in Kerwin 192). However, he emphasized that the act would not negatively affect those who live on the territory of the United States legally (Kerwin 192). Although the statements of this act seem lawful, the problem of illegal immigration is controversial and has many unclear points.
The act mentioned above played a significant role in shaping the current immigration policy in the U. S. Kerwin claims that it completely transformed the immigration policies in the country and laid the ground for the policies of Trump’s administration (193). During Trump’s first fiscal year, the U. S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) removed around 61000 immigrants from the country (Pierce et al. 3). Moreover, more than 110000 people were arrested by ICE in the same period (Pierce et al. 3). This trend continued, and in total, the U. S. removed more than 226000 people in 2017 (Kerwin 193). These large numbers serve as evidence of the seriousness of Trump’s policies and the activeness of their embodiment.
Social issues regarding immigration policy in the U. S.
Aside from the general state of affairs, the U. S. immigration policy is difficult for families that live in the United States. The law often dictates outcomes that make families divide because of breaking the immigration policy. Kerwin states that “US immigration enforcement practices more broadly separate and restructure families by removing members already in the United States, creating single-parent households or leaving children without a parent” (198). As a result, families are unsettled and impoverished, and the continuous threat of deportation erupts families’ sense of security and well-being (Kerwin 198). Children of deported parents may become feared or even depressed, and they can experience school troubles, displacement, and poverty (Kerwin 198). Therefore, that can negatively impact the U. S. future generations and population because the immigration policy does not concern the familial circumstances while enacting the law.
However, immigration based on the family has been a significant part of the U. S. immigration policy for a long time. According to Gubernskaya and Dreby, skill-based immigration is favored in other countries, while the United States admits more immigrants who have family connections to the nationals in comparison to other categories of immigrants (418). The researchers report that family migrants constitute around 65% of the total immigration annually, which more than two times higher than Australian and Canadian indicators (Gubernskya and Dreby, 419). Therefore, the immigration policy of a country with such a high level of family-based immigration should probably be more loyal to families while embodying the principles of the policy.
Nevertheless, the familial aspect and related problems are not the only specifically addressed category of the U. S. immigration policy. Many difficulties are evident regarding the migration of black people and other representatives of different races. That is where the U. S. immigration policy correlates with structural racism. Many researchers, publicists, and public figures address that issue in their works and speeches, proving the significance of the problem. A different application of the immigration policy depending on a person’s race does not seem appropriate, and that is why the procedure might need reconsideration.
Structural racism: black exceptionalism and white supremacy
The first aspect of the immigration policy to consider is the goals pursued by that policy. Valdez and Golash-Boza state that the U. S. immigration policy is concerned with “how immigrants and their descendants integrate into the United States economy and society” (2). Immigration scholars try to understand the immigrants’ incorporation using an ethnicity framework, while the majority of the immigrants currently origin from ethnic minorities (Valdez and Golash-Boza 2). That concerns black people too, and the phenomenon of distinct relation to black people is called black exceptionalism. Valdez and Golash-Boza state the following:
Black exceptionalism persists in contemporary assimilation theory. Yet, rather than dismiss blacks from consideration altogether, segmented assimilation theory concludes that black immigrants and their descendants follow in the footsteps of disadvantaged African Americans, a trajectory of “downward assimilation” that relegates this group to a permanent and poor position outside the mainstream. (13)
The mere fact that such a phenomenon exists in the U. S. immigration policy is a problem that requires exploration. Making immigration exceptions for people of other races might not be appropriate for the immigration policy.
The opposite term, in this case, is so-called white supremacy. According to Valdez and Golash-Boza, it is a condition of socioeconomic inequality between races and ethnicities with the superiority of white people (14). However, finding a solution is difficult due to the limitations caused by structural racism (Valdez and Golash-Boza 14). Those limitations concern understanding the role that races and ethnicities play in challenging the structures of domination and power (Valdez and Golash-Boza 14). Summing up, the purpose of black exceptionalism in the U. S. immigration policy is to ensure white supremacy.
As for structural racism, it is a complex concept that is one of several types of racism. For instance, Valdez and Golash-Boza define structural racism as “structural relationships that produce racialized outcomes” (15). The difference in the well-being of black and white people in the U. S. can be traced not just through immigration policy. For instance, the researchers report that today white Americans are 20 times wealthier than black Americans and 18 times richer than Latinos (Valdez and Golash-Boza 16). The reason for that lies in a complex historical process that involved slavery, institutionalized racism, and general discrimination (Valdez and Golash-Boza 16). Therefore, the current problem of structural racism related to the U. S. immigration policy has a long history, in a manner.
Moreover, structural racism in the immigration system causes various difficulties for the immigrants inside the country. For example, Palmer illustrates the lack of advocacy and protection on behalf of black immigrants, which impedes building meaningful criminal and immigration justice reform (100). The researcher reports that around 3.8 million black immigrants are currently on the United States territory (Palmer 101). The black immigrants’ attainment rates of an educational degree compared to other immigrant groups, though they tend to get lower salaries (Palmer 101). Moreover, they have the highest unemployment rate among any other group of foreign-born people (Palmer 102). Despite the indicators mentioned above, the plight of black immigrants seems to be invisible for the U. S. immigration and criminal justice (Palmer 103). However, it is a significant problem that should not be ignored and requires an immediate solution.
Additionally, there are many other injustices and inequalities related to black immigrants. For instance, Palmer states that they are held in detention for criminal convictions more often, and they are 3.5 times more often detained for a violation of the immigration policy (102). Black immigrants’ chances of being deported because of a criminal conviction are also higher than other races (Palmer 102). Palmer calls that phenomenon “anti-black racism” and states that it exacerbates the black immigrants’ vulnerabilities (103). Therefore, the threat of deportation is not the only significant problem for black immigrants because life in the U. S. is difficult for them as well.
Aside from social and working problems, black immigrants also have issues regarding their involvement in the U. S. health care system. For instance, Misra et al. claim that “the role of structural racism on population health, particularly health inequities, is gaining traction in public health discourse in the United States” (332). The researchers state that health inequities based on race are an attribute of racism, whereby social race construction implies that certain racial groups appear to be inferior to others (Misra et al. 333). Such an attitude suggests treating black people differently, which leads to disempowerment, devaluation, and differential allocation of resources, power, and opportunities (Misra et al. 333). Misra et al. state that the reason for that is “white supremacy, a political, economic, social, and cultural system that affords white people with disproportionate power, resources, and opportunities” (332). Therefore, the white supremacy mentioned previously in this paper plays a significant part in black immigration and appears to be the main reason for structural racism in the U. S.
Conclusion
Summing up, structural racism in the immigration system seems like an open implication of injustice and illustrates weaknesses in the immigration policy, and thereby it might need reconsideration. Framing immigration as a threat to the U. S. society and the economy creates breaches in the immigration policy. It provokes instability that may be dangerous for immigrants and U. S. citizens. Indicators of people removed from the country are extremely high. Moreover, many of them have families, which means that, in this case, a wife can lose a husband, or a child can lose a parent, which is a severe threat to the U. S. general population. The racial exceptions in implying the immigration policy illustrate the system’s imperfection and appear to be a clear example of structural racism, which is not appropriate. In brief, the plight of black people and other oppressed races and ethnicities is caused by white supremacy established in the United States historically. Such a state of affairs is especially difficult for black immigrants, who suffer from white supremacy and imperfections of the immigration policy. Thus, the immigration policy might require corrections concerning structural racism.
Works Cited
Gubernskaya, Zoya, and Joanna Dreby. “US immigration policy and the case for family unity.” Journal on Migration and Human Security vol. 5, no. 2, 2017, pp. 417-430.
The researchers from the University at Albany, State University of New York, review and critically evaluate the principle of family unity. The authors call it a hallmark of the United States immigration policy in the past 50 years and the most crucial mechanism for immigration to the U. S.
Kerwin, Donald. “From IIRIRA to Trump: Connecting the dots to the current US immigration policy crisis.” Journal on Migration and Human Security, vol. 6, no. 3, 2018, pp. 192-204.
The article discusses the law’s effects and subsequent policies related to the US immigration enforcement apparatus, removal, asylum, detention, the criminal prosecution of immigrants, the treatment of immigrant families, and joint federal-state enforcement activities.
Misra, Supriya, et al. “Structural Racism and Immigrant Health in the United States.” Health Education & Behavior, vol. 48, no. 3, 2021, pp. 332-341.
The authors build on and synthesize the work of prior scholars to advance how society codifies structural disadvantages for racialized immigrants into governmental and institutional policies and how that affects health.
Palmer, Breanne J. “The crossroads: Being black, immigrant, and undocumented in the era of #BlackLivesMatter.” Geo. JL & Mod. Critical Race Persp., vol. 9, no. 2, 2017, pp. 99-121.
The article discusses the detrimental, intersectional effects of immigration law and criminal law on Black immigrants. The author considers how racism funnels Black immigrants into criminal justice and subsequently into removal or other punitive immigration proceedings.
Pierce, Sarah, Jessica Bolter, and Andrew Selee. “US immigration policy under Trump: Deep changes and lasting impacts.” Migration Policy Institute, vol. 9, 2018.
The researchers consider how the words and deeds of President Trump and his administration have shaped new thinking and policy about the direction of immigration. The authors also discuss the impact of said deeds on America’s future.
Valdez, Zulema, and Tanya Golash-Boza. “US racial and ethnic relations in the twenty-first century.” Ethnic and Racial Studies, vol. 40, no. 13, 2017, pp. 2181-2209.
The article reveals the limitations of focusing on ethnicity or race in isolation and instead urges a new framework that brings them together. The authors consider African-American entrepreneurs, the Mexican middle class, and black immigrant deportees for their study.