The book has several strengths. Its major strength is that it documents how more attention to family reunification
has led to a more diverse immigrant population. Indeed, the diverse geographic origins of recent immigrants who
seek to bring family members to the United States has only continued a trend toward more arrivals from Latin America,
Africa and Asia. DeLaet also does a good job of recounting many of the arguments regarding employer sanctions
and how such sanctions might result in discrimination against members of ethnic groups regardless of their citizenship
or immigration status. The book also reviews the history of immigration policy in concise form. And DeLaet provides
a useful picture of current immigration patterns to the United States and how they differ from the historical trends.
Unfortunately, this descriptive work cannot make up for the weakness of the book's thesis.
Page 266 begins here
DeLaet argues that U. S. immigration policy poses a conundrum for political analysts. Although the population
as a whole supports restricting immigration, Congress in 1986 and 1990 passed bills which allowed for greater immigration
because they did not sufficiently regulate the employment of aliens, provided for an amnesty for undocumented workers,
and expanded access to visas. DeLaet argues that Congress did this "because of lobbying by a liberal coalition
of ethnic groups, churches, civil rights organizations, and employer associations." It is the addition of
employer groups to this "liberal coalition" that should alert readers to a possible problem.
DeLaet asserts that "Employer associations' demands for access to workers with particular occupational characteristics
and for the protection of their due process rights have converged with the civil and human rights concerns of churches,
ethnic groups and civil rights organizations." This may be true, but the addition of employers to this picture,
and the likelihood that they were a particularly potent part of this coalition, cannot be taken as evidence for
DeLaet's larger thesis that civil rights has been "a fundamental factor" in shaping U. S. immigration
policy.
The convergence of business interests with civil rights concerns need not result in discounting the impact of civil
rights organizations on immigration policy. However, the book's greatest weakness is the simple lack of documentation
for the claim that civil rights rhetoric or the political pressure applied by civil rights groups made much difference
in contemporary immigration policy. Certainly the provisions in both the 1986 and 1990 Acts prohibiting discrimination
on the basis of ethnicity demonstrate that civil rights concerns were an important part of the picture. Unfortunately,
there are no quotations from testimony before Congress by civil rights
groups, few references to congressional findings indicating a concern for the civil liberties of legal or undocumented
aliens, no analysis of congressional voting patterns, and little beyond assertions that civil rights groups were
effective in their goals. DeLaet acknowledges that both business groups and civil rights groups actively opposed
sanctions against employers for hiring undocumented workers. Disappointingly, she provides no evidence which would
allow one to judge which of these two groups was more effective or that the civil rights groups had any concrete
effect at all.
Indeed, one might as easily argue that, given the realities of campaign finance and political power in the United
States, business interests were primarily responsible for liberalizing immigration policy. Not only do business
interests have significant political power because of their wealth and status, but also their opposition to employer
sanctions tied in nicely with contemporary rhetoric opposing greater governmental regulation of business in other
areas. Similarly, while DeLaet notes that family reunification has become a more prominent part of immigration
policy, she produces no documentation to show that this was accomplished through pressure
by civil rights groups or that family reunification was portrayed in rights-based language. Christian fundamentalist
groups also embraced family reunification as a goal because of its "pro-family" orientation. Policies
which are more humane or which lead to greater ethnic diversity in immigration are not necessarily, as DeLaet's
argument suggests, the result of consciousness regarding civil rights.
A second weakness of the book is the cursory treatment that it gives of the
Page 267 begins here
1996 immigration reforms, which were largely focused on matters of financial responsibility and the eligibility
of resident aliens to receive government benefits. DeLaet's comments on this major piece of legislation, which
poses a serious problem for her thesis, are contained in a little over two pages in her conclusion and are largely
descriptive. The 1996 Act included provisions requiring that immigrants support themselves, that families sponsoring
relatives guarantee the financial self-sufficiency of the new arrivals, and that undocumented aliens were ineligible
to receive certain government benefits. In addition, the 1996 Act made it much easier for the Immigration and
Naturalization Service to exclude aliens summarily, to deport resident aliens because of criminal offenses, and
to deny political asylum
without appeal. Thus, the 1996 Act directly challenges DeLaet's thesis regarding the continuing relevance of civil
rights rhetoric for immigration policy.
DeLaet's response to this problem posed by the 1996 Act is weak. It may be true, as she argues, that the 1996
Act will do little to deter illegal immigration. However, her strongest argument that the Act accommodated concerns
over civil rights is based on the Act's failure to significantly strengthen employer sanctions or to fund enforcement.
DeLaet observes that "Civil rights advocates and ethnic organizations lobby against workplace raids and efforts
at interior enforcement, which they fear may lead to harassment and discrimination against ethnic minorities..."
However, she still does not provide the reader with any evidence that it was civil
rights groups' efforts that weakened the Act; once again, it is just as likely that business interests adamantly
opposed to employer sanctions and workplace raids were primarily responsible for this omission in an otherwise
restrictive law.
A study, which documented how civil rights concerns have influenced immigration policy, would have been a valuable
contribution to the literature on why rights, rights discourse, and organized interest groups matter in the political
process. However, U. S. IMMIGRATION POLICY IN AN AGE OF RIGHTS fails to marshal the evidence that would demonstrate
the effectiveness of civil rights organizations or the importance of rights rhetoric for contemporary American
immigration policy. Those looking for a decent short summary of recent changes in U. S. immigration policy will
find it in DeLaet's volume. Those, like the reviewer, hoping for clear and convincing proof of the power of liberal
ideas and politics will be disappointed.
*****************************************************************
Copyright 2000 by the author, Daniel Levin.