Srl | Item |
1 |
ID:
080468
|
|
|
Publication |
2007.
|
Summary/Abstract |
In addition to a geopolitics of containment model of immigration policing at the Mexico-US border, US immigration-related statecraft has incorporated a geopolitics of engagement model in which spaces previously at arms reach from US immigration authorities and at some remove from the border have been aggressively brought into the purview of US immigration enforcement. These newly engaged spaces are at once local (i.e., US cities) and regional (i.e., Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean Basin). This shift has in large part been a response to the tension between trade and security at the border, and thus allows us to see differently how statecraft is being multiplied, reactivated and transformed at and away from the border in light of the war on terrorism and its complex relationship with economic globalisation and the neoliberalisation of the Mexico-US border region.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
ID:
113523
|
|
|
Publication |
2012.
|
Summary/Abstract |
An argument can be made that US lawmakers' replacement of "deportations" and "exclusions" with "removals", in the mid-1990s, marked a decisive about-face in US deportation and exclusion practice by virtue of the due process restrictions that this brought about for a new class of noncitizens deemed neither deportable nor excludable. However, I argue here that the geography of due process rights under assault in the mid-1990s immigration lawmaking were never that certain in the first place. By reviewing a range of key court cases and immigration control practices from the Chinese Exclusion era through the present, I argue that US geopolitical borders have never mapped directly onto its legal-territorial borders as concerns deportation and exclusion. Nonetheless, I also point to a recent, "neo-classical" hardening of US immigration enforcement by virtue of the disconnect between geopolitical and legal-territorial borders in US immigration law.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|