My Blog

Blog Post #1

In the book, Kanstroom argues that there are two basic types of deportations laws. The first type of law is extended border control. As the book states, it implements basic features of sovereign power: control of territory by the state and the legal distinction between citizens and non-citizens (Kanstroom page 5). Extended border control laws deal a lot with deportation as they mandate deportation of those who have entered this country secretly, or by way of fraud. Another way it deals with deportation is by deporting those who violate any law their conditional agreement for entry to the United States. The Second type of deportation law is post entry social control. This type of deportation law aimed to deport citizens for just about any reason. The book says that in this type of law they could very well deport non-citizens for an act or otherwise that was not a valid reason for deportation before. For example, if a non-citizen commits a crime that wasn’t a valid reason for deportation it now could because they were able to change these requirements.

One example that shows the first deportation type of law was an event in 1919. In this instance, a woman by the name of Emma Goldman was denaturalized without notice and deported back to her country. The Government labeled her as an “alien radical” (Kanstroom page 7) The next event that exemplifies extended border patrol, was in the case of Fong Yue Ting when he was deported for being unable to find a “credible white witness” (Kanstroom Page 7) both of these examples show Extended Border Control because ultimately they showcase America’s sovereignty over aliens. Both events are also examples of post-entry social control, because as it states in the book that they may be “deported for any reason” (Kanstroom page 6)

On a different note, an example that shows the second type of deportation law, Post entry social control events around the “War on Terrorism”. In this type of deportation law, it states that permanent residents as well as non-citizens were subject to deportation at the hands of the government for whatever reason. One event that displayed this, occurred after 9/11. The book states that a man named Tarek was arrested because INS believed he was illegal (Kanstroom page 8). Tarek’s bail was removed and he was thoroughly interrogated. This was done to more than just him. A post 9/11 America, struggled for security for its citizens. This event exemplified the need for social control for what many deemed a pseudo-sense of security as many went after people from the middle east. The last example for these types of deportation laws was when a Muslim man overstayed his visa and was incarcerated for months prior to his removal. Again, a need for security and social control prompted the United States to act in such a manner. Much like now as the president has targeted Muslims in the United States despite, for the most part, them having no connection to ISIS.

In conclusion the understanding deportation laws through both of these lenses is critical to understanding deportation. As we look through each lens we understand both the motive behind deportation and the flaws that it presents when applied in the real world. By understanding both of these things we can work to someday make a change in the way we view immigration as a whole, and the process of legalization. The usefulness of understanding immigration laws through these lenses lies in learning from the past. As many say, history repeats itself so by being knowledgeable we can try to prevent history from repeating the many horrible stories regarding unjust deportation.

Blog Post #2

With second wave immigration we saw how the early immigration system was expanded and refined. Both chapter three and four have similarities as well as differences when it came to the law, court cases, and people regarding immigration. In this blog post I will be explaining what themes and ideas both chapter held in common as well as similar developments both might have. Ultimately I believe that chapter 4 does show expansion or refinement because it radically changed the immigration system and the way they handled deportations. Many of the laws set in place were post-entry social control that was necessary to establishing laws as to who gets deported.

In chapter 3 we explore the early introduction into modern deportation laws. In this chapter it states that up until the mid-nineteenth century the topic of immigration was seen as a matter of state police power. (Kanstroom page 92) it was not until after this time that the federal government got involved. Prior to this, it shows that states had their own systems in place in regards to handling immigration such as, head taxes and state laws requiring masters of ships to provide detailed reports on immigrants on board. During this time the supreme court case, The City of New York v. Miln and the 1849 Passenger cases both divided the court. Several acts were introduced in chapter 3 including the immigration act of 1864 which permitted Chinese immigration under a ticket system, and the page act of 1875 which prohibited certain Chinese laborers brought involuntarily and convicts and prostitutes. (Kanstroom page 93)

Chapter 4 really contrasts the events in chapter 3 because of the changing times in the immigration system. We see an introduction of a new immigration act that refines a new quota system limiting the number of new immigrants allowed from eastern and southern Europe. (Kanstroom page 132). Similar to chapter 3 we see a continued and stricter barring of Chinese immigration and Asian immigration in general with the barred Asiatic zone. The 1917 immigration act linked the criminal justice system with deportations. This act link was brought on by three mechanisms: the seriousness of the crime was determined by the length of the sentence and multiple offences, the nature of crime was determined by a “rather vague standard” and a time limit was established for 5 years after entry (Kanstroom page 134). in contrast to chapter 3 this chapter talks more about deportation rather than acts to keep people out. We see bills in this chapter aimed to get rid of narcotic offenders including those who are related to the importation of opium, cocaine and other substances (Kanstroom page 134)

In conclusion, Chapter four does demonstrate the expansion and refinement of deportation laws because they change how we handle such laws and the role the federal government took after the mid nineteenth century. Both chapter 3 and 4 have contrasting events that shaped the refinement of such laws in chapter 4. In chapter 3 laws and acts were focused on limiting entry and keeping certain people out. Chapter 4 focused on deporting people who were already in this country. Both chapters were similar in that they both talked about Chinese immigration and the steps taken in each time period to keep Chinese and Asian people out of this country.

Blog Post #3

The history of deportation is not a subject I thought I would ever be open to learning about. There is a sour taste in the mouths of many people who have had to say goodbye to a loved one because of deportation including myself. However, this class has really taught me a lot about immigration, deportation, and the various laws that encompass both of those things. Kanstroom’s argument that the U.S. deportation system has not accomplished much demonstrable good, and has caused considerable harm” is one that I completely agree with. I also agree that the system is poorly planned, irrationally administered, and dangerous to base this model to other enforcement systems.

I am going to touch base first on the first part of the argument that Kanstroom makes that “as a 100-plus years’ social experiment, the U.S. deportation system has caused considerable harm and done little demonstrable good” (Kanstroom Page 243) when we look at deportation as a whole, who does it truly benefit? The answer is nobody, deportations cost money, whether it is staffing the immigration system or for facilities deportation. Deportation has undoubtedly separated family and loved ones for such a long time now. Too many injustices have been faced by immigrants here in the United States.

Immigration has been necessary for this nation to prosper, from African forced migration, to the immigrants of the Bracero Program, Immigration has been the key factor for this nation’s economy. Unfortunately, deportations have been great in numbers as well as in the case of the Bracero immigrants. In the 1930’s immigrant began being deported in southern California. Unfortunately, this mass deportation was poorly planned, and caused irreparable harm. Many of the young Mexicans that were being deported had in fact been U.S. citizens. Another example during this time was a roundup which occurred on February 26, 1931. In this event Kanstroom talks about the roundup of some 400 men, women, and children by immigration agents and Los Angeles Police. This roundup was one of the many injustices immigrants faced as these people were shipped directly to Mexico without even a chance to say goodbye to loved ones. This goes to show also how poorly planned these deportations were. Not everyone at this time had to opportunity to voluntarily migrate back to Mexico. Had they been allowed that right they would have been able to come back to the United States someday legally.

Another reason why I support Kanstroom argument that deportation has caused harm and there was no demonstrable good was the fear that many lived in at the hands of malicious employers. As Kanstroom argues, deportation threats were an integral part of the labor system. Not only were immigrants treated poorly, now they had employers threatening to out their employers. In the book Kanstroom argues that provisions relating to the harboring of illegal aliens served the interest of the employers. The immigration act of 1917 did not penalize employers so employers were free to hire these immigrants and treat them as they wanted. One can only imagine the psychological damage done by these employers. Here are immigrants with good intentions, only wanting to provide for their families, at the same time living in fear that they could very well be deported. This is a human rights problem, as employers know that immigrants must work to support their families and will do whatever it takes to do so, but they also knew that they can control their workers this way.

The second part of the argument that Kanstroom makes that deportations are poorly planned, irrationally administered and dangerous to model other enforcement systems can be shown in the book greatly when speaking about the “repatriados” I mentioned this in my argument earlier about Mexican immigrants being deported or repatriated back to Mexico forcibly. This I believe is a really great example of this statement. These roundups did not only target illegal immigrants it targeted Mexicans as a whole. This event really goes to show how poorly planned these deportations were. Had they been planned better, they would have only rounded-up illegal aliens. Now, I understand that many first generation immigrants were the parents of those younger Mexicans who were U.S. citizens I just think that this was poor planning.

Modern day examples that showcase both of these statements have occurred here in Arizona. From former sheriff Joe Arpaio’s roundups on city streets to the controversial bill SB 1070 allowing police officers to racially profile the state’s inhabitants there are many examples that really show Kanstroom argument. A couple notable event’s that come to mind happened recently about 2 years ago, at a local car wash, Immigration and Customs enforcement raided the workplace and ended up detaining several people. This truly caused much harm, to the business itself but more importantly to the families of those detained.

In conclusion, there are many examples whether in the book or in modern day events that demonstrate the dark, and scary side of deportation system. I completely agree with Kanstroom on his argument that the deportation system has caused only harm with no demonstrable good. As well as, that the system is as a whole poorly planned, irrationally administered and dangerous to model as a whole for other enforcement agencies. I agree to with these statements because there are several examples in the book, and in modern day recent events that agree with these arguments. I think that we must find a better way to handle the influx of immigrants crossing the border illegally and a way to keep families together for those that are already living here in the united states. we must be willing to curb our post-entry social control methods and give way to naturalization of immigrants. Until we can manage to do that deportation is going to be an unfortunate reality for many families and immigrants living in the United States. No child should have to fear that they will never get to see their parents again or that they will be deported themselves. I think that we are off to a good start with the DACA program for these individuals but we definitely need to expand this program to parents with children born here in the United States.