Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: At the time of the founding, men such as Jefferson could speak confidently of nature as that which was common to all men as men. Nature served as a foundation for a new experiment in liberty by providing a standard of right to which all had access while also sustaining common opinion and action. But though it may be truer now than ever that no distinction between men can be drawn from nature as such, the concomitant ability of nature to serve as a foundation for the practice of liberty has been drawn into question. Whether through the progress of science, which strives to see man in light of nature’s blind and indifferent processes, or from the insights of philosophy, which reject if not deride the idea of something outside of man serving as his guide, it no longer seems true that nature has any relation to liberty. Yet if it is true that our practice of liberty requires a foundation that at once both binds and guides, then the question of nature can no longer be ignored. This paper first seeks to assess the threat our contemporary understanding of nature poses to our practice of liberty by pointing out the implications of the latter continuing to take its bearings by the former’s theoretical orientation. Secondly, this paper will attempt to sketch a new, more productive relationship between nature and liberty by asking not what the former can say to the latter, but instead what the latter can show the former about the nature of man, and therewith, about the nature of right.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: In this paper, we assess whether parental legal status at the time of initial migration and parental naturalization affect political participation among the young adult 1.5 and 2nd generation children of the immigrants. Our analysis is based on a recently completed telephone survey of 1.5 and 2nd generation young adults (aged 20 to 40) in the five county Los Angeles region – the Immigration and Intergenerational Mobility in Metropolitan Los Angeles (IIMMLA) survey. In the analysis presented in this paper, we focus exclusively on the Mexican and Salvadoran/Guatemalan 1.5 and 2nd generation respondents. We find that knowing whether a Mexican, Salvadoran, or Guatemalan 1.5 or 2nd generation immigrant had a parent who entered the United States in an unauthorized status or who naturalized does add to our understandings of the likelihood of that person participating in community or electoral politics. Immigration status at entrance and parental naturalization relate to participation in the range of community and civic activities for Mexicans (and weakly for Salvadorans/Guatemalans), and to the likelihood of registering to vote for Salvadorans/Guatemalans.

Publication Type: Invited Paper

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Over time, there has been controversy surrounding how and what marriage means for US citizenship and the US nation-state. One of the clearest examples of how marriage mediates the power of US citizenship can be found in the context of US immigration policy. In 2004, more than 43% of all temporary visa holders come to the US through the immediate family visa- for all spouses, children, and parents of US citizens. This is more than any other type of visa (such as work, education, or refugee). Between the years of 1992 and 2003, the number of K visas issued (specifically for fiancés of US citizens) had increased by more than 500% while the number of total visas issued during this same time frame had declined by nearly 10% (US Congressional Budget Office). Though these trends appear significant, very little research has explored the impact of marital policy through the frame of US immigration. This paper aims to frame the ‘nuts and bolts’ of how marital policy is used as a method to ‘naturalize’ non US citizens, explore the theoretical and social implications of how marriage is constructed and understood as an institution of the US nation-state, and illustrate the impact of race and gender in marital immigration policy construction for not only the production but also the potential reproduction of US citizens.