{"title":"Mass deportation and the intensity of policing in the United States' 100-mile border zone: Complicating the “border”/“interior” enforcement binary","authors":"Geoff Boyce","doi":"10.1111/lapo.12232","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This paper draws on an expansive archive of internal government records obtained using the US Freedom of Information Act to examine federal, state and local police practice within the United States' 100-mile border zone. Analysis of this archive reveals a large number of “border” enforcement events that involve the arrest of US citizens, lawful permanent residents and others with deep roots in US communities. It further shows how, regardless of where US Border Patrol agents operate, those whom they target overwhelmingly tend to be persons of Latin American origin. Reflecting on these enforcement patterns, the paper argues for the troubling of categorical distinctions between “border” and “interior” enforcement that permeates scholarly, popular and journalistic accounts of the contemporary geography of mass deportation in the United States. As an alternative, the paper calls for greater attention to the “intensity” of immigration policing, as a way to account for multiple overlapping pathways of enforcement and to diagnose how the networked interconnectivity of agencies, personnel, resources and infrastructures involved in these activities amplifies the risks of racial profiling, arrest, and a host of related downstream consequences (family separation, financial hardship, diminished educational performance, and adverse health outcomes) for US citizens and noncitizens alike.</p>","PeriodicalId":47050,"journal":{"name":"Law & Policy","volume":"46 2","pages":"90-111"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/lapo.12232","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law & Policy","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/lapo.12232","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This paper draws on an expansive archive of internal government records obtained using the US Freedom of Information Act to examine federal, state and local police practice within the United States' 100-mile border zone. Analysis of this archive reveals a large number of “border” enforcement events that involve the arrest of US citizens, lawful permanent residents and others with deep roots in US communities. It further shows how, regardless of where US Border Patrol agents operate, those whom they target overwhelmingly tend to be persons of Latin American origin. Reflecting on these enforcement patterns, the paper argues for the troubling of categorical distinctions between “border” and “interior” enforcement that permeates scholarly, popular and journalistic accounts of the contemporary geography of mass deportation in the United States. As an alternative, the paper calls for greater attention to the “intensity” of immigration policing, as a way to account for multiple overlapping pathways of enforcement and to diagnose how the networked interconnectivity of agencies, personnel, resources and infrastructures involved in these activities amplifies the risks of racial profiling, arrest, and a host of related downstream consequences (family separation, financial hardship, diminished educational performance, and adverse health outcomes) for US citizens and noncitizens alike.
期刊介绍:
International and interdisciplinary in scope, Law & Policy embraces varied research methodologies that interrogate law, governance, and public policy worldwide. Law & Policy makes a vital contribution to the current dialogue on contemporary policy by publishing innovative, peer-reviewed articles on such critical topics as • government and self-regulation • health • environment • family • gender • taxation and finance • legal decision-making • criminal justice • human rights