By Agustina Laurito, Ashley N. Muchow 

Deportations of immigrants from the United States have grown substantially over the past two decades. While existing research has examined how changes to US laws and policies have contributed to this increase, less attention has been given to how conditions in immigrants’ countries of origin shape deportation patterns. This article investigates how an important external shock—home-country natural disasters—influences immigrant removals from the US. We combine annual data on removals by country with information on natural disasters to estimate difference-in-differences models that exploit exogenous variation in the timing and magnitude of natural disasters across countries. Our results show that immigrant removals increased, on average, by 29 percent after salient natural disasters. When we explore mechanisms, we find little evidence that home-country natural disasters increase irregular migration, but we do find that noncitizen and likely undocumented immigrants increase their labor force participation and employment following these shocks. This finding suggests that natural disasters in immigrants’ countries of origin may influence the economic behavior of immigrants, putting them at greater risk of detection by immigration enforcement authorities.

By Tina Law 

There is a growing multidisciplinary effort to understand the political causes and consequences of the US deportation system amid rapidly changing policies and significant data limitations. I contribute to this timely work by considering how interactions between an increasingly empowered executive branch and a politically polarized Congress shape deportation policymaking. I apply a policy feedback approach, a theoretical lens that analyzes policies and polities as co-constitutive, and construct a novel dataset to computationally analyze how Congressmembers publicly responded on Twitter to the Trump administration’s implementation and suspension of the family separation policy in 2018, during which migrant parents were prosecuted and detained separately from their children. Findings suggest that Republican and Democratic Congressmembers are unlikely to respond to executive assertions of power on deportation, even when policies are highly unpopular among the public. This raises concerns about shared governance on deportation policy and its implications for migration and democracy.

Converging Paths?

By Daniel G. Reginald

Although both Brazil and the United States inherited European norms that accorded whites privileged status relative to all other racial groups, the development of their societies followed different trajectories in defining white/black relations. In Brazil pervasive miscegenation and the lack of formal legal barriers to racial equality gave the appearance of its being a “racial democracy,” with a ternary system of classifying people into whites (brancos), multiracial individuals (pardos), and blacks (pretos) supporting the idea that social inequality was primarily associated with differences in class and culture rather than race. In the United States, by contrast, a binary system distinguishing blacks from whites by reference to the “one-drop rule” of African descent produced a more rigid racial hierarchy in which both legal and informal barriers operated to create socioeconomic disadvantages for blacks. But in recent decades, Reginald Daniel argues in this comparative study, changes have taken place in both countries that have put them on “converging paths.” Brazil’s black consciousness movement stresses the binary division between brancos and negros to heighten awareness of and mobilize opposition to the real racial discrimination that exists in Brazil, while the multiracial identity movement in the U.S. works to help develop a more fluid sense of racial dynamics that was long felt to be the achievement of Brazil’s ternary system. Against the historical background of race relations in Brazil and the U.S. that he traces in Part I of the book, including a review of earlier challenges to their respective racial orders, Daniel focuses in Part II on analyzing the new racial project on which each country has embarked, with attention to all the political possibilities and dangers they involve.

University Park, PA, Penn State University Pess, 2006