Synopses & Reviews
The United States deported nearly two million illegal immigrants during the first five years of the Obama presidencyandmdash;more than any previous administration. President Obama stands accused by activists of being andldquo;deporter in chief.andrdquo; Yet despite efforts to rebuild what many see as a broken system, the president has not yet been able to convince Congress to pass new immigration legislation, and his record remains rooted in a political landscape that was created long before his election. Deportation numbers have actually been on the rise since 1996 when two federal statutes sought to delegate a portion of the responsibilities for immigration enforcement to local authorities.
Policing Immigrants traces the transition of immigration enforcement from a traditionally federal power exercised primarily near the US borders to a patchwork system of local policing that extends throughout the countryandrsquo;s interior. As federal authorities set local law enforcement to the task of bringing suspected illegal immigrants to the federal governmentandrsquo;s attention, local responses have varied. While some localities have resisted the work, others have aggressively sought out unauthorized immigrants, often seeking to further their own objectives by putting their own stamp on immigration policing. Tellingly, how a community responds can best be predicted not by conditions like crime rates or the state of the local economy but rather by the level of conservatism among local voters. What has resulted, the authors argue, is a system that is neither just nor effectiveandmdash;a system that threatens the core crime-fighting mission of policing by promoting racial profiling, creating fear in immigrant communities, and undermining the critical community-based function of local policing.
Review
andldquo;Policing Immigrants is one of the few books to comprehensively analyze the devolution of immigration enforcement into the andlsquo;patchworkandrsquo; of policies and practices that defines contemporary immigration policy in the United States. Drawing on a large cache of original data, the authors trace in careful detail the historical development of the variations across local jurisdictions and provide clear and in-depth analysis of devolution is proceeding, including the challenges and implications. The book makes an important contribution.andrdquo;
Review
andldquo;How to address immigration is among the most significant political issues in the United States. With the political parties increasingly polarized on whether or how to integrate the eleven million undocumented immigrants presently in the country, Policing Immigrants makes a major contribution to our understanding of US legal policy on immigration and will contribute to the debate for years to come. No other book so well describes the dramatic variations in local immigration enforcement or the implications for local communities and federal policy.andrdquo;
Synopsis
As the controversies surrounding President Obamaand#8217;s immigration enforcement policies demonstrate, we tend to examine the immigration dilemma from the top down. Reflecting their backgrounds in law and society studies, Doris Marie Provine and her coauthors instead examine conflicts from the bottom up, focusing on the interactions among local communities, local law enforcement officials, and immigrants and their advocates. For over a century, the federal government had virtually sole authority over immigrant admission and enforcement policy. But the adoption of two federal statutes in 1996 specifically delegated some federal immigration enforcement powers to the local level. and#147;Policing Immigrantsand#8221;is the first book-length study of the this ongoing, turbulent experiment in immigration federalism: its history, its consequences, and the problems it has created. Provine and her coauthors draw upon seven case studies of communities that vary in size, in their political leanings, their economies, and in their location (from Arizona and Texas to Oregon and Connecticut). These studies are integrated with data from three national surveys of local law enforcement executives: police chiefs in large cities, chiefs in smaller communities (suburban and rural), and county sheriffs. Their findings are both fascinating and disturbing--they show, for example, how the enforcement-based approach that the federal government has taken since the late 1990s conflicts with local law enforcementand#8217;s commitment to the principle of community-oriented policing. Tellingly, the intensity of local policies is best predicted, not by objective community conditions such as crime rates of demographic shifts, but rather by the degree of conservatism among local voters, leading to a and#147;race to the bottomand#8221; in enacting extreme measures. In brief, the authors find that the current system is neither just nor effective and that the community-engaging function of local policing is undermined by, and incompatible with, enforcing federal immigration law.
About the Author
Doris Marie Provine is professor emerita in the School of Social Transformation at Arizona State University. She is the author of several books, including Unequal under Law and Judging Credentials, both also published by the University of Chicago Press.Monica W. Varsanyi is associate professor of political science at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, CUNY, and on the doctoral faculties of geography and criminal justice at the CUNY Graduate Center.Paul G. Lewis is associate professor in the School of Politics and Global Studies at Arizona State University.Scott H. Decker is the Foundation Professor of Criminology and Criminal Justice at Arizona State University.