Matching Items (4)
Filtering by
- Member of: Theses and Dissertations
Description
This thesis seeks to answer the question: "What do artistic representations add to the dialogue about the U.S.-Mexico border and immigration beyond political rhetoric and popular media portrayals?" Drawing on political communications (as put forth by Edelman and Altheide), socio-political construction (particularly the White Racial Frame put forth by Feagin), and collective memory theory (especially those of Halbwachs and Pollak), this thesis uses a dual-coding, content analysis to examine the linguistic and visual messages disseminated through news media. Then, interviews with and the work of six immigrant artists are examined for their contribution to the information put forth in the news media. This study finds that news reporting bias falls along a continuum from pro-immigration to extreme anti-immigration (labeled "fearful" reporting). The news media skew strongly toward anti-immigration to fearful in bias, and there is no opposite pro-immigration bias. Through observations of artists' work, the study concludes that artistic representations of the border can fill this strongly pro-immigration void on this bias continuum.
ContributorsMcCarty, Kelly Erin (Author) / Téllez, Michelle (Thesis advisor) / Stancliff, Michael (Committee member) / Segura, Joseph (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2011
Description
By drawing from six oral histories of Mexican immigrant women living in Phoenix, Arizona, this thesis builds on the current literature on Mexican immigrant women living in the United States. Through an analysis of U.S. policies that spur Mexican migration to the U.S. and its simultaneous policies that dissuade and criminalize immigrant presence in the U.S., I highlight the increased level of migration through Arizona and the ensuing anti-immigrant politics in the state. By centering women in this context, I demonstrate the obstacle Mexican immigrant women face in the crossing and upon arrival in Phoenix, Arizona. In sharing the stories of Mexican immigrant women who overcome these obstacles, I challenge the portrayal of Mexican immigrant women as victims of violence and use the work of Chicana feminist theorists and oral history methodology to highlight the experiences of Mexican immigrant women adapting to life in the U.S. in order to expand literature of their unique lived experiences and to also contribute the stories of resiliency of Mexican immigrant women in the contentious anti-immigrant city of Phoenix, Arizona.
ContributorsDel Hierro, Mariana (Author) / Téllez, Michelle (Thesis advisor) / Elenes, Alejandra C. (Committee member) / Cuadraz, Gloria H. (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2012
Description
This study analyzes how current U.S. immigration enforcement policy has been carried out, specifically under the implementation of the Secure Communities (S-Comm) program. Paying special attention to the enforcement-only policy hysteria and immigration patchwork trend since the 2000s, this study has the following research questions: (1) whether S-Comm has faithfully implemented enforcement actions for removing "dangerous" criminal noncitizens; (2) how counties with different immigration perspectives have responded to such an immigration enforcement program; and (3) whether the implementation of S-Comm has really made local communities safer as in the program goal.
For analysis, 541 counties were selected, and their noncitizen enforcement results under S-Comm were analyzed with 5 time points, covering a 13-month period (Dec. 2011 - Jan. 2013) with longitudinal data analyses. In spite of the rosy advertisement of this program, analysis of S-Comm showed a very different picture. Unlike the federal immigration agency's promise of targeting dangerous criminal noncitizens, 1 in 4 noncitizen removals were for noncriminal violations, and more than half of noncitizen deportations were for misdemeanor charges and immigration violations in the name of "criminal aliens." Based on latent class analysis, three distinct subgroups of counties having different immigration enforcement policy perspectives were extracted, and there have been huge local variations over time on two key intergovernmental enforcement actions under the implementation of S-Comm: immigration detainer issuances and noncitizen deportations. Finally, unlike the federal immigration agency's "immigrant-crime nexus" assumption for legitimating the implementation of S-Comm, no significant and meaningful associations between these two factors were found. With serious conflicts and debates among policy actors on the implementation of S-Comm, this program was finally terminated in November 2014; although, the essence of the policy continues under a different name.
A series of results from this study indicate that the current enforcement-only policy approach has been wrongfully implemented, and fundamental reconsideration of immigration policy should be made. Enforcement-focused immigration policy could not solve fundamental immigration-related problems, including why noncitizens immigrate and how they should be dealt with as humans. More rational and humane approaches to dealing with immigration should be discussed at the national and local levels.
For analysis, 541 counties were selected, and their noncitizen enforcement results under S-Comm were analyzed with 5 time points, covering a 13-month period (Dec. 2011 - Jan. 2013) with longitudinal data analyses. In spite of the rosy advertisement of this program, analysis of S-Comm showed a very different picture. Unlike the federal immigration agency's promise of targeting dangerous criminal noncitizens, 1 in 4 noncitizen removals were for noncriminal violations, and more than half of noncitizen deportations were for misdemeanor charges and immigration violations in the name of "criminal aliens." Based on latent class analysis, three distinct subgroups of counties having different immigration enforcement policy perspectives were extracted, and there have been huge local variations over time on two key intergovernmental enforcement actions under the implementation of S-Comm: immigration detainer issuances and noncitizen deportations. Finally, unlike the federal immigration agency's "immigrant-crime nexus" assumption for legitimating the implementation of S-Comm, no significant and meaningful associations between these two factors were found. With serious conflicts and debates among policy actors on the implementation of S-Comm, this program was finally terminated in November 2014; although, the essence of the policy continues under a different name.
A series of results from this study indicate that the current enforcement-only policy approach has been wrongfully implemented, and fundamental reconsideration of immigration policy should be made. Enforcement-focused immigration policy could not solve fundamental immigration-related problems, including why noncitizens immigrate and how they should be dealt with as humans. More rational and humane approaches to dealing with immigration should be discussed at the national and local levels.
ContributorsJung, Dongjae (Author) / Cayer, N Joseph (Thesis advisor) / Lewis, Paul G (Thesis advisor) / Herbst, Christopher M (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2015
Description
In recent decades, the United States has experienced a wave of immigration, an economic recession, and several terroristic attacks. In response, the government has scapegoated and blamed undocumented immigrants of color for recent social ills. As a result, a large share of government resources has been allocated to the enforcement and processing of immigration violations. Consequently, the number of immigration cases processed in U.S. federal courts has spiraled to nearly 50% of bookings and 34% of federal sentencing cases. Yet, immigration offenses have received little empirical attention in the courts and sentencing literature due in part to differences in the way immigration offenses are processed compared to other federal offense types, and relatedly, the empirical difficulties immigration offenses pose for analysis. Nevertheless, the increased representation of immigration offenses in federal courts, along with the punitive rhetoric and heightened social control targeting undocumented immigrants of color, warrants a comprehensive assessment of how immigration cases are processed in U.S. federal courts. Accordingly, this dissertation seeks to identify inequality in the processing of immigration cases by examining: 1) cumulative disadvantage within immigration cases; 2) contextual disparity and how social context interacts with ethnicity to influence multiple federal court outcomes within immigration cases; and 3) ethnic disparity within immigration cases over time.
Data come from the Federal Justice Statistics Program Data Series, the U.S. Census, the Uniform Crime Reports, Leip’s Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections, the National Judicial Center, and the U.S. Department of Justice. The quantitative analysis addresses the first question by employing a cumulative disadvantage approach where multiple decision points are considered and the effects of prior stages on subsequent outcomes. The quantitative analysis proceeds to address the second question by using multilevel modeling for multiple court outcomes. The longitudinal analysis is separately conducted on sentence length for 18-year data, from 1994 through 2012, to assess racial and ethnic disparity over time.
The results indicate that cumulative disadvantage is present within immigration cases, that social context influences certain decision points, and that ethnic disparity has diminished over time in some districts.
Data come from the Federal Justice Statistics Program Data Series, the U.S. Census, the Uniform Crime Reports, Leip’s Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections, the National Judicial Center, and the U.S. Department of Justice. The quantitative analysis addresses the first question by employing a cumulative disadvantage approach where multiple decision points are considered and the effects of prior stages on subsequent outcomes. The quantitative analysis proceeds to address the second question by using multilevel modeling for multiple court outcomes. The longitudinal analysis is separately conducted on sentence length for 18-year data, from 1994 through 2012, to assess racial and ethnic disparity over time.
The results indicate that cumulative disadvantage is present within immigration cases, that social context influences certain decision points, and that ethnic disparity has diminished over time in some districts.
ContributorsBeckman, Laura Owen (Author) / Wang, Xia (Thesis advisor) / Spohn, Cassia (Committee member) / Zatz, Marjorie S. (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018