The Immigration Crisis of 1980

ABSTRACTCrisis, subjectivity and the polymorphous character of immigrant family detention in the United States. Territory Politics Governance. This article expands on research into the politics of ‘immigration crises’ by bringing feminist insights to bear on how one understands the political unfolding of immigration crises. In order to do so, it draws on ethnographic research and media and policy analysis to trace the 2014 ‘immigration crisis’ surrounding unauthorized family immigration and detention in the United States. In doing so, it is argued that in order to understand the shifting spatialities and mechanisms of border enforcement we must also attend to the way in which these processes play out in relation to different forms of subjectivity; cultural and legal frameworks surrounding precisely who can be detained and how detention can play out shapes the legal and practical options available to policy-makers and border enforcement agencies. Moreover, in examining both the proliferation of brick-and-mortar family detention centres as well as the adoption of geographically unfixed enforcement strategies, this article illustrates the constantly evolving and polymorphous character of immigrant family detention in the United States.

In The Immigration Crisis in Europe and the U.S.-Mexico Border in the New Era of Heightened Nativism, Victoria Cartycompares the immigration crises in the European Union and the United States. Beginning in 2014, the Arab Spring upheavals and failed states in Northern Africa and the Middle East overwhelmed many European countries which the European Union system was not prepared for. In the Americas, failed states in Central America such as Honduras, Guatemala, and El Salvador also led to an unexpected influx of immigrants to the United States, many of them unaccompanied minors, fleeing gangs, violence and poverty. In The Immigration Crisis in Europe and the U.S.-Mexico Border, Carty studies theories of immigration, social movements, and critical race theory to provide a better understanding of the current immigration crises in Europe and the United States. Carty shows that the high volume of immigration in both the EU and the United States has led to a resurgence of nativist sentiments and white supremacy groups.

In The Immigration Crisis in Europe and the U.S.-Mexico Border in the New Era of Heightened Nativism, Victoria Cartycompares the immigration crises in the European Union and the United States. Beginning in 2014, the Arab Spring upheavals and failed states in Northern Africa and the Middle East overwhelmed many European countries which the European Union system was not prepared for. In the Americas, failed states in Central America such as Honduras, Guatemala, and El Salvador also led to an unexpected influx of immigrants to the United States, many of them unaccompanied minors, fleeing gangs, violence and poverty. In The Immigration Crisis in Europe and the U.S.-Mexico Border, Carty studies theories of immigration, social movements, and critical race theory to provide a better understanding of the current immigration crises in Europe and the United States. Carty shows that the high volume of immigration in both the EU and the United States has led to a resurgence of nativist sentiments and white supremacy groups.

Data and do-files for replication of the article "Refugees Unwelcome? Changes in the Public Acceptance of Immigrants and Refugees in Germany in the Course of Europe’s ‘Immigration Crisis’"

The U.S. Immigration Crisis and a Call for the Church's Lifeworld Politics: Why Should Hauerwas Collaborate with Habermas on the U.S. Immigration Crisis? Ilsup Ahn Introduction: Saying “No” to the State's Biopolitics Against the Undocumented Migrants According to the recent survey report published by the Washington, D.C.‐based Public Religion Research Institute, throughout 2013, there has been consistent bipartisan and cross‐religious support for creating a path to citizenship for immigrants living in the United States. While 14 percent percent of Americans support allowing undocumented immigrants to become permanent legal residents but not citizens, 63 percent favor providing a way for immigrants who are currently living in the United States without legal documentation to become citizens provided they meet certain requirements. They also discovered that nearly two‐thirds of Americans believe that the U.S. immigration system is either completely broken (34 percent) or mostly broken but working in some areas (31 percent). The report also shows that 41 percent of Americans believe immigration policy should be an immediate priority for President Obama and Congress, while roughly as many (42 percent) say it should be a priority during the next couple of years. Interestingly enough, only 14 percent of Americans say it should not be a priority at all. Despite the majority of the U.S. citizens favor some sort of comprehensive immigration reform, the Congress has failed to pass a comprehensive immigration overhaul to date largely due to the House Republican leaders, who recently unveiled their principles for an overhaul for the nation's immigration laws. These principles, however, do not clarify whether most undocumented immigrants would ever be able to become legal residents or U.S. citizens, while they would require tighter border security and more interior immigration enforcements. These principles seem to reiterate the problematic anti‐immigration mantra to continuously militarize our borders as well as to criminalize undocumented immigrants. The Obama administration has been increasingly criticized in regard to the inhumane deportation of many undocumented people, especially those parents whose children are U.S. citizens. Critiques argue that President Obama has overseen record levels of deportations, with ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) repatriating about 2 million undocumented people since he took office in January 2009 (roughly 400,000 a year or 1,100 per day). Amid the increasing political turmoil relating to the immigration reform, the public media begin to notice that the real winners in immigration control are the prison industry. The Atlantic, for example, reports that since 2003, when ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) was created and government crackdowns on undocumented aliens increased, private prisons have gained business, with industry profits more than doubling. Damon Hininger, CEO of CCA (Corrections Corporation of America), said during a conference call with investors in May 2010 that between 2007 and 2009, when earnings for the S&P dropped by 28 percent, the company's earnings drew by 18 percent. According to The Atlantic, the government spends more than $2 billion a year on immigration detention, while spending only $72 million on alternatives to detention. It also reports that the private prison industry, such as CCA, has spent more than $1 million on lobbying. Although private prisons say that their lobbying efforts are aimed at promoting their services, not shaping immigration policy, immigrant advocates argue that the private prison industry is always lobbying for more detention beds. Given that the cost of detaining an immigrant averages $159 a day and half of 34,000 beds are operated by private prison corporations, it is not difficult to see the connection between the interests of the private prison corporations such as CCA and the Geo Group and the criminalization of undocumented migrants. According to Lee Fang of The Nation, the controversial Arizona SB1070 was developed in consultation with private prison lobbyists through a group called the American Legislative Exchange Council. Unfortunately, as Aubrey Pringle reports, several pending immigration bills would increase the number of incarcerated immigrants even more. The ongoing political struggles related to the increasing border militarization, the widespread criminalization of undocumented migrants, and the massive deportation of undocumented parents are the explicit exemplification of what philosophers Michel Foucault and Giorgio Agamben call the...

This article explores the applicability of democratic functionalism as a theoretical framework explaining mechanisms of European Union (EU) politicization during immigration crises. Since most existing studies on the politicization of EU crisis situations focus on the Euro crisis, it is unclear if and how the politicization of EU immigration crises differs. Drawing on a 2011 crisis with legislative implications for the free movement of people in the Schengen Area, the article illustrates that immigration crises are politicized along exclusionary identities rather than along pro-/anti-European lines—as expected by democratic functionalism. Moreover, unlike in the Euro crisis, the 2011 case illustrates how the media can be instrumentalized by governments during immigration crises, with little political mobilization from the public. This case is relevant given the widespread politicization of the 2015 refugee crisis, which conversely attracted close media attention and caused serious public concern. As it stands, democratic functionalism is shown to lack a conceptualization of how much and for how long an issue needs to be contested in the European public sphere for the mechanisms of EU politicization described by the theory to hold.

Immigration remains one of the most pressing and polarizing issues in the United States. In The Immigration Crisis, the political scientist and social activist Armando Navarro takes a hard look at 400 years of immigration into the territories that now form the United States, paying particular attention to the ways in which immigrants have been received. The book provides a political, historical, and theoretical examination of the laws, personalities, organizations, events, and demographics that have shaped four centuries of immigration and led to the widespread social crisis that today divides citizens, non-citizens, regions, and political parties. As a prominent activist, Navarro has participated broadly in the Mexican-American community's responses to the problems of immigration and integration, and his book also provides a powerful glimpse into the actual working of Hispanic social movements. In a sobering conclusion, Navarro argues that the immigration crisis is inextricably linked to the globalization of capital and the American economy's dependence on cheap labor.

Chapter 1 Preface Chapter 2 Introduction: The Immigration Crisis Chapter 3 Chapter One: Exodus to the New World (40,000 B.C. - 1930s) Chapter 4 Chapter Two: Re-Mexicanization of Aztlan (1848-1940) Chapter 5 Chapter Three: Re-Start of the Migrant Exodus (1942-1964) Chapter 6 Chapter Four: Third Phase of the Migrant Exodus (1965-1989) Chapter 7 Chapter Five: Fourth Phase of the Migrant Exodus (1990-1999) Chapter 8 Chapter Six: Rise of Nativist Vigilantes and Militias (1999-2004) Chapter 9 Chapter Seven: The Minutemen Project (2005-2007) Chapter 10 Chapter Eight: Nativist Anti-Immigrant Hate Groups On Rise (2005-2007) Chapter 11 Chapter Nine: Mexicanos Respond to the Rancher Vigilante and Militia Crisis (2000-2005) Chapter 12 Chapter Ten: NAHR's Response to the Raids &Minutemen Project (2004-2005) Chapter 13 Chapter Eleven: Rise of the Nativist Legislative Surge (2004-2007) Chapter 14 Chapter Twelve: Rise of the Movimiento Pro-Migrante (2006) Chapter 15 Chapter Thirteen: Decline of MPM and its Mobilizations (2006-2007) Chapter 16 Epilogue: The Immigration Crisis: What Now?

The U.S. Immigration Crisis and a Call for the Church's Lifeworld Politics: Why Should Hauerwas Collaborate with Habermas on the U.S. Immigration Crisis?

It has been claimed that migration was the quintessential experience of the twentieth century. Since the end of the Cold War, conflicts produced by the ‘new wars’, ecological disasters and deepening global inequalities have generated an ever-increasing number of refugees, people who have been thrown into a condition of ‘liminal drift’, without voice or place, on the margins of the world. In the past decade or so, a range of filmic cultural texts have attempted to give definition and articulation to the displaced and their experience of being undesirable and placeless, a cinema of destitution. The destitute – including refugees, exiles, migrant workers, refused asylum seekers and undocumented aliens – are those who are not only impoverished but also abandoned by the narrative monopolies, inclusions and exclusions of the sovereign nation-state, lacking social or political mediation, outside of thought even, except as part of an ‘immigration crisis’. However, what for the sovereign nation-state is a moment of crisis – ‘fortress Europe’ – is also for the displaced a moment or space of encounter which raises the hypothetical possibility of becoming a political subject. The films offer the basis for a political critique of ‘exceptionalism’ – the placing of the abandoned outside the realm of the juridical and civil polity – by developing challenging narratives which seek to anchor the destitute and excluded through cultural recognition and symbolic spaces, both local and global, which help to reconstitute them, potentially, as politically qualified subjects: their stories are voiced as more than suffering victims, those who are always already narrated. Deleuze's concept of a ‘minor cinema’ will be used as one theoretical basis for the argument that, speculatively, the destitute are ‘the people who are missing’, or ‘not yet’, and that the films do not represent them as such but help bring them into existence, produce a set of enabling images that summon them into meaning.

Following the Cold War, changes in the international landscape often trigger significant shifts within domestic political systems. This new era has ushered in fresh and pressing challenges, including the rise of non-state actors and a surge in global crises. Developments in the domestic arena reflect and influence global dynamics, often exploited by groups seeking power. The cyclical nature of far-right parties in Europe shows a pattern where their popularity rises and falls in response to shifting social and political contexts. Support for these parties often surges during economic uncertainty, immigration crises, or cultural tensions. They capitalize on these moments by promoting nationalist, anti-immigration, and anti-establishment narratives. Far-right parties in Europe demonstrate cyclical popularity, surging during economic uncertainty, immigration crises, or cultural tensions. Issues like financial crises and xenophobia have bolstered support for these parties. This study will explore the dynamics behind the success of rising far-right parties in Europe.

Based on an innovative design, combining a multi-factorial survey experiment with a longitudinal perspective, we examine changes in the public acceptance of immigrants in Germany from the beginning of the so-called 'migration crisis' to after the sexual assaults of New Year's Eve (NYE) 2015/2016. In contrast to previous studies investigating similar research questions, our approach allows to differentiate changes along various immigrant characteristics. Derived from discussions making up the German immigration discourse during this time, we expect reduced acceptance especially of those immigrants who were explicitly connected to the salient events, like Muslims and the offenders of NYE. Most strikingly, we find that refugees were generally highly accepted and even more so in the second wave, whereas the acceptance of immigrants from Arab or African countries further decreased. Moreover, female respondents' initial preference for male immigrants disappeared. Contrary to our expectations, we find no changes in the acceptance of Muslims. We conclude that (i) public opinion research is well advised to match the particular political and social context under investigation to a fitting outcome variable to adequately capture the dynamics of anti-immigrant sentiment and that (ii) the vividly discussed upper limits for refugees seem to be contrary to public demands according to our data.

The article analyzes the impact of the European immigration crisis on disintegration processes in the European Union. After the presentation of the genesis and development of the immigration crisis in Europe after 2015 author, attempts to show the existing differences between countries in the context of the current immigration crisis. The final part of the study shows the source of the existing differences between the Member States. An attempt was also made to assess the consequences for the European Union of further intensification of disintegration processes.

The purpose of this article is to analyse the attitude of the Visegrad Group countries towards the immigration crisis in the EU. The article shows the joint activities of the V4 countries and their decisions taken at national level. The main thesis posed in this article states that the negative attitudes towards compulsory relocation of immigrants have activated the Visegrad Group countries and have integrated them with common aims. The article shows a split in among the member states of the EU and thus a lack of solidarity in solving the immigration’s problem.

Immigration Crisis in Texas: The Impact of the Exotic Axis Deer on the Texas Hill Country