Detention, deportation, devolution and immigrant incapacitation in the US, post 9/11

Abstract

In this paper we examine perhaps the most significant shift in US immigration enforcement since the militarisation of the US-Mexico border in the late 1980s and early 1990s -the now decade-long transformation of immigration enforcement from an outwards-looking power, located at the territorial margins of the state, into also an inwards-looking power focused on resident immigrant everydays. In large measure this shift in the geography of immigration policing is due to an unprecedented devolution of a once exclusively federal power to regulate immigration to nonfederal law enforcement agencies operating in non-border spaces in the post-9/11 environment. We argue that the result of this shift in the 'where' of immigration enforcement amounts to a spatialised tactic of immigrant 'incapacitation'.

From humanitarian exceptionalism to contingent care: Care and enforcement at the humanitarian border

“…The linking of border enforcement and terrorism prevention functioned to expand the geography of immigration enforcement and policing. As Mathew Coleman (2007; see also Coleman & Kocher, 2011) has illustrated, border and immigration enforcement has been devolved to local and state law enforcement agencies and spatially extended into the interior of the United States through 287(g) agreements and related Secure Communities programs (see also , Varsanyi 2008). These collaborations deputize non-federal law enforcement agencies to enforce immigration laws and police unauthorized migrants at locations far removed from the literal borders of the nation.…”

“…While much scholarly research has examined the processes, practices, and effects of border enforcement globally, this literature focuses largely on the punitive aspects of border regulation (e.g., apprehension, detention, and deportation) (Burridge, 2011;Coleman 2007Coleman , 2009Coleman , 2012Coleman & Kocher, 2011;Cornelius, 2001;Dunn, 1996Dunn, , 2009Mountz, 2010;Nevins, 2010;Phillips, 2009); the application of border enforcement technologies (e.g., Amoore, 2006Amoore, , 2009Hassner and Wittenberg 2009;Maril 2011;Muller 2011); and the discursive frameworks through which border enforcement is justified (e.g., Ackleson, 2005;Bigo 2002;Jones 2011;Newman & Paasi, 1998;Sundberg 2008;Sundberg and Kaserman 2007). Only recently have scholars begun examining responses to migrant deaths or other 'humanitarian' measures taken to provide for the care of unauthorized migrants and, in some instances, provide them with legal status (e.g., Albahari 2006;Burridge, 2011;Cook, 2011;Millner 2011;Squire, 2014;Ticktin, 2011).…”

In Harm’s Way: Family Separation, Immigration Enforcement Programs and Security on the US-Mexico Border

“…First, literature based on qualitative, historical, and meta-theoretical interpretations of border enforcement procedures has focused on the human and social costs of migration, especially migrant deaths in the desert (Andreas 2000;Nevins 2002;Nevins and Aizeki 2008;Heyman 2008;Martinez, Cantor, and Ewing 2014). The second, more recent body of literature has developed around deportation, especially interpreting the potential deportability of both authorized and unauthorized immigrants as a form of social control (Coleman 2007(Coleman , 2009Núñez and Heyman 2007;Varsanyi 2008;De Genova and Peutz 2010;Varsanyi 2010;Coleman and Kocher 2011).…”

“…Studies have shown that these programs lead to a racialized form of policing, generating extreme distrust between minority communities and the police (Coleman and Kocher 2011). Research has also illustrated that the S-Comm rollout had no impact on alleviating index crime rates at the local level (Miles and Cox, forthcoming).…”

Making Immigrants into Criminals: Legal Processes of Criminalization in the Post-IIRIRA Era

“…The data on 287(g) -which is not readily available except through federal records requests -suggests a similar pattern, although more skewed towards non-serious and ultimately noncriminal cases. For example, published research on 287(g) shows that the program typically works by stopping suspected immigration violators on the road, while driving, for basic traffic offenses Coleman and Kocher 2011;Coleman and Stuesse 2016;Coleman 2012).…”