Minorities will comprise the majority demographic by 2050 in the U.S., according to the U.S. Census Bureau. However, current immigrant populations, which comprise a majority of the minority communities in the U.S., are largely marginalized from the political process. Nearly 60 percent of the foreign-born population in the U.S. does not have citizenship, so this disenfranchisement has political consequences.
Kim Ebert, assistant professor in sociology, studied the political dynamics in 52 metropolitan immigrant communities around the U.S. in an attempt to understand how these demographics participate in civic life.
“This broader study looks at immigrant/political incorporation,” Ebert said. “Basically how communities are adapting to new communities and how these communities are receiving them.”
Ebert partnered with Dina Okamoto from the University of California-Davis in 2006 to investigate the various elements of civic involvement in immigrant populations. Their pilot study, Beyond the Ballot, was recently published and is only the first step in a larger process of research.
“We will continue the research and perhaps in five years we’ll publish a book with the Russell Sage Foundation, a great resource in the social sciences,” Ebert said.
The study focused on immigrant growth in “new immigrant destinations” as well as measured various factors that contribute to hostile environments to immigrant participation in politics.
“This focuses more on how immigrant populations are organizing on their own and how they participate in civic and political life,” Ebert said. “The study looks at two forms of collective action. We followed protests in which participation is more political and active. We also looked at immigrant involvement in civic life and affairs, in which they come together to solve a problem or to celebrate their ethnic heritage.”
Due to the large amount of immigrants who can vote, political protests tend to be go-to forms of activism. Examples range from the 2006 protest in which millions of Hispanics across the nation in 100 cities protested against the House of Representatives bill H.R. 4437, which would have put stronger immigration controls into law as well as curbed amnesty to immigrants.
The bill, which received strong support on Capitol Hill, was ultimately shot down by the outcry from the protests, demonstrating the clout that this protest carried.
“Protests of this size and scope are rare, but this was a victory in for many Latino immigrants,” Ebert said.
The study includes trends tracking immigration to “new immigrant destination.” Raleigh is an example of a new immigrant destination, which has only recently experienced a large influx of population of growth since the beginning of the 20th century. “New immigrant destinations” indicate moving patterns to places of economic opportunity as well as show evidence of a close-knit immigrant community.
The immigrant population in the Triangle and Triad has exploded within the past thirty years, bringing in both migrant workers as well as professionals. Immigrants from South Asia, East Asia, the Middle East and Latin America have settled in large numbers in North Carolina, exemplifying how the state is a “new immigrant destination.” It is not just economic opportunities that spur the growth, but also the appeal of small ethnic enclaves.
Shima Ghattan, a sophomore in biological sciences, is an Iranian American who grew up in Greensboro, NC.
“I grew up with a lot of other Persian families,” Ghattam said. “Every other weekend there would event at someone’s house with dinner. At times, my family has hosted 30 other Iranians. We don’t really have extended family here, so we are basically all family in the community.”
Other examples of this civic support network include Spanish language newspaper, ¿Qué Pasa?, published every week in the Triangle. Besides delivering national and local news, the newspaper carries an entire section on immigration and tips for easier life in the U.S. for Latino expatriots. The newspaper takes a pro-immigration stance and strongly encourages the Latino community to participate in political issues.
Ebert’s study focused on immigrant political action in light of hostile environments against immigrants. The research revealed that immigrants were most likely to participate in the political process if antagonized.
“Our findings confirm that immigrant-native segregation and anti-immigrant activity were important predictors of collective action where immigrants were main organizers and participants,” the study said. “Threats to immigrants could have consistently created a hostile environment where group action was too risky, and immigrant-native segregation could have socially isolated immigrants, weakening their political opposition…Instead, both facilitated immigrant collective action.”
However, heightened racial tension in the U.S. has become a repercussion of immigration. Daniel Hopkins, a researcher from Georgetown University, wrote, “Hostile political reactions to immigrants are most likely when communities undergo sudden influxes of immigrants and when salient national rhetoric reinforces the threat.”
SB 1070, the Arizona state law on illegal immigration, exemplifies the most current and publicized example of radical anti-immigration policy. Following the trend Hopkins suggests, Arizona experiences the largest influx of immigrants, thus this crossroads has controversially attracted the national spotlight.
