Karina Shklyan. 2021. “Disillusioned Defenders? The Integration Challenges of American Jewish Return Migrants in the Israel Defense Forces.” Nations and Nationalism 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1111/nana.12767
There is a consensus within the ethnic return migration literature that ethnic migrants experience difficulty integrating into the ethnic homeland due to (1) state policies that inhibit permanent settlement and upward mobility and (2) social marginalization from the native-born community. Absent those experiences, one would expect that ethnic migrants would smoothly integrate and be a successful example of nation-building for the homeland. This paper examines lone soldiers in Israel (immigrants who do not have immediate family in the country) as an example of an immigrant group that is provided with substantial government support for integration and is publicly heralded by Israeli media as model citizens. Based on 52 interviews with former lone soldiers, this paper argues that even in an “extreme case” of state- and society-supported ethnic return, lone soldiers feel marginalized due to their disillusionment with Israeli state politics and linguistic, behavioural and cultural boundaries between themselves and Israelis.
Kevin Beck and Karina Shklyan. 2021. “Civic Engagement, Legal Status, and the Context of Reception: Participation in Voluntary Associations among Undocumented Immigrants in California.” Socius 7:1-16. https://doi.org/10.1177/23780231211005214
For undocumented immigrants, processes of integration are contingent on the qualities of their local context. A lack of legal status may require them to strategically manage their presence in order to avoid detection that could lead to deportation. The authors ask how the need to mask one’s legal status affects the civic integration of undocumented immigrants. Drawing primarily on data from the California Health Interview Survey, the authors estimate the probability of participation in voluntary associations for undocumented immigrants. They naturalized immigrants and find that undocumented immigrants exhibit a lower rate of participation but that this low rate of participation is unlikely the result of their legal status. The findings also show that undocumented immigrants are less likely to participate in voluntary associations if they live in counties where large shares of voters cast votes for Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election.
Tom Wong, Karina Shklyan, and Andrea Silva. 2021. “The Effect of Intergovernmental Policy Conflict on Immigrants’ Behaviors: Insights from a Survey Experiment in California.” Publius: The Journal of Federalism 1-28. https://doi.org/10.1093/publius/pjab008
As Congress remains gridlocked on the issue of comprehensive immigration reform, immigration policy debates, particularly with respect to interior immigration enforcement, are increasingly taking place at state and local levels. Scholarship on immigration federalism has focused on federal and local governments, while states are passing laws that tighten or delimit cooperation with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (i.e., “sanctuary policies”). Simultaneously, cities are passing laws contradictory to state policy. We examine how these state and local enforcement ambiguities affect undocumented immigrants’ trust in the efficacy of sanctuary policies. Using California as a case, we embedded an experiment in a survey of undocumented immigrants and find trust in sanctuary policies decreases when cities seek to opt out of statewide sanctuary laws. Further, “opting out” has negative implications for the daily behavior of undocumented immigrants, like the chilling effects resulting from local law enforcement cooperation with federal immigration enforcement.
Tom Wong, Karina Shklyan, Anna Isorena, and Stephanie Peng. “The Impact of Interior Immigration Enforcement on Undocumented Immigrants’ Interactions with the State and Society.” Under Review.
How does interior immigration enforcement affect how undocumented immigrants describe their interactions with state and societal institutions? Although there is some evidence that points to a broad range of chilling effects that result when local law enforcement officials work with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) on federal immigration enforcement, there is no systematic study that collectively examines the impacts that may result with such enforcement efforts. We situate our paper as evidence of the homeland security state and show how this contemporary interior immigration enforcement, which entangles local law enforcement officials in federal immigration enforcement efforts, serves to subjugate undocumented immigrants in nearly all facets of their interactions with state and societal institutions. In this study, we embedded an experiment in a survey (n = 594) drawn from a probability-based sample of undocumented immigrants in order to better understand how the behaviors of undocumented immigrants are affected when local law enforcement officials do the work of federal immigration enforcement. When respondents are told that local law enforcement officials are working with ICE on federal immigration enforcement, they are 60.8 percent less likely to report crimes they witness to the police, 42.9 percent less likely to report crimes they are victims of to the police, 69.6 percent less likely to use public services that requires them to disclose their personal contact information, 63.9 percent less likely to do business that requires them to disclose their personal contact information, and are even 68.3 percent less likely to participate in public events where the police may be present, among other main findings.