Recent research from Europe has found that immigrants are less likely to move to locations politically run by far-right parties. With two large political parties in the U.S., there is no far-right or far-left party.
The UC Davis School of Law and UC Davis Law Review are hosting a panel and an academic symposium to commemorate the 25th anniversary of the passage of Prop. 187 on November 13-14, 2019. The panel will feature litigators who challenged Prop. 1897 in the courts. The academic symposium will discuss the influence Prop. 187 had on immigration at the state and federal levels, the political environment in California, and Latinx and immigrant communities in four panel discussions.
This paper asks how the evolution of cultural ideas about credibility shapes the form of asylum claims, and in light of this process, how asylum-seekers navigate competing demands to make credible claims of persecution and fear. Using a sample of 150 asylum claims from around the world, lodged over a 30-year period, it shows how asylum-seeking takes place in culturally “unsettled times,” which require claimants to adjust the ways they seek to demonstrate their credibility as they navigate the competing demands of organizational legibility, legal requirements, and cultural perceptions.
In this paper, Briana Ballis examines the spillover effects of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). This policy significantly increased the returns to schooling for undocumented youth, leaving the returns for everyone else unchanged. Leveraging administrative data from Los Angeles schools and variation in the concentration in DACA-eligible youth across schools, it also finds significant positive effects of DACA on high school completion and student achievement among ineligible peer groups.
This symposium explores contemporary dynamics of migration in North America, including the criminalization of migrants, the securitization of borders, migrant detention, family separation, deportation, and return migration, from a multidisciplinary perspective, and in dialogue with social organizations.
Even the most authoritarian governments allow some citizens to leave. How do they decide who can leave? In this paper, Associate Professor Margaret Peters argues that authoritarian leaders face trade-offs when deciding which individuals should be allowed to leave.