Whose America? U.S. Immigration Policy Since 1980

Whose America? is a sequel of sorts to A Nation of Immigrants Reconsidered: US Society in an Age of Restriction, 1924–1965 (2019) where the present editors were joined by Madeline Y. Hsu. This anthology does not begin in 1965 where the earlier volume ended; rather it starts in 1980 with the passage of the Refugee Act. The editors note that the history of immigration policy since 1980 has received “surprisingly little scholarly attention,” which became even more clear to the editors as they read “the ahistorical evaluations of the Trump Administration's immigration policies” (p. vii).The volume thus examines significant legislative and policy responses since 1980 to the Hart-Celler Act, otherwise known as the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 (INA). The chapter topics and their authors are well chosen. (The only post-1980 topic that I think also might have been included is the resurgence of state-level immigration laws.) The chapters have very little repetition, and the contributors refer to each other's chapters, which I suspect is the result of the editors’ deft touch. The endnotes are printed after each chapter, and all the authors provide ample citations to the relevant literature.In an excellent introduction, the editors set the stage for the book's nine chapters by providing an overview of the 1965 Act and the legislative changes since 1980, such as the Refugee Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA), and the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigration Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA).The anthology is organized around four major developments in US immigration policy since 1980. The first two chapters examine punitive responses to undocumented immigration. Elliot Young looks at how “the wholesale imprisonment of citizens and the mass detention and expulsion of immigrants” are two forms of elimination that have removed marginalized people from American society (p. 23). These two distinct carceral regimes are part of the same machine. Leisy J. Abrego builds upon her interviews with Central American and Mexican migrants to show the “legal violence” produced through the implementation of US immigration policies.The next two chapters turn from exclusion and expulsion to new opportunities for entry for “skilled” immigrants and the winners of the Diversity Visa lottery, often overlooked topics in immigration policy history that generally focuses on exclusion and expulsion. Monique Laney discusses post-World War II developments in recruiting of migrants with skills in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). She argues that the US STEM-skills preference system has “adversely affected both migrants and U.S. citizens” (p. 71). Carly Goodman offers a fascinating look at the creation in 1990 of the Diversity Visa Program, a new permanent immigration category. This program proved to be “more expansive than its proponents initially planned,” becoming a major source of African immigration. Both its genesis in the 1990 legislation and its somewhat surprising endurance suggests to Goodman that the program “tapped into something fundamental” about how Americans view themselves.The impact of the post-Cold War national security state on immigration and travel policies are addressed in the next two chapters. Julia Rose Kraut explores how since 1903 the federal government has excluded non-citizens from entry based upon their political beliefs. The Supreme Court gave the executive unbridled discretion to exclude non-citizens for ideological reasons until 1972 when it required federal officials to at least provide a facially legitimate and bona fide reason for the exclusion. After Congress in 1987 repealed the ideological exclusion provisions in immigration law and gave non-citizens First Amendment protections, the executive branch shifted to antiterrorism as the basis for visa denials—“the use of ideological exclusion to suppress dissent and free association has persisted” (p. 133). Julio Capó, Jr., provides an overview of how immigration policy from 1980 to 2000 was based upon fears of sexuality, gender, and race. After 1980, courts interpreted gender and sexuality in ways that broadened the protections of asylum.The final three chapters address “humanitarian” immigration policies. Carl J. Bon Tempo explains how the “get tough” approach to immigration in the 1980s and 1990s sparked a “fierce countermovement” by advocates who argued for the human rights of immigrants. Carl Lindskoog portrays the resilience and ingenuity of the Sanctuary Movement since 1986. Yael Schacher describes how the United States Supreme Court harmed asylum seekers by its misreading of the history of removal of asylum seekers and by setting the standard of proof for obtaining asylum too high.Whose America?, particularly if paired with A Nation of Immigrants Reconsidered, would be a great choice for undergraduate, graduate, or law school classes on the history of immigration. A lot of ground is covered succinctly and clearly. This sequel is as good as the original. After putting together these two great anthologies, I hope the editors are now planning a prequel on immigration policy during the long nineteenth century.