Illegal immigration has been a debated topic in America, and anti-immigrant policies in states such as Arizona, as well as the recent presidential campaign display the hostile anti-immigrant attitude held in this country. The anxiety that led to the institution of strict immigration laws came from a belief that illegal immigrants commit a disproportionate number of crimes. Arizona had a history of passing restrictions on illegal immigration, and eventually the growing Hispanic population and an increase in drug and human related violence led to the adoption of a very strict immigration legislation known as Arizona SB 1070. At that time Arizona had an estimated 460,000 undocumented aliens, which is a fivefold increase since 1990 mostly because
…show more content…
State law enforcement officers were required to check on the immigration status of individuals whenever there was reasonable doubt that the person is here lawfully. They could arrest people on these grounds, and suspects would not be released unless their immigration status was confirmed. If an individual was found to be an illegal immigrant, they would be transferred to the custody of Federal immigration authorities. Some states also tried to follow Arizona’s path and enforce their immigration rules.
This law sparked protest and boycotts in many cities around America, and several lawsuits were filed against the Act. The main concern was that the actions according to the law would violate human rights of both Americans and lawful immigrants. Supporters of the law claimed that there is nothing in the law that requires racial or ethnic profiling, nor does it allow for arrests without a cause. Protesters believed that this would lead to widespread racial profiling and discrimination against Latinos. After a six year battle some of the requirements were challenged and relaxed, but anti-immigrant sentiment …show more content…
People belonging to different groups can live together peacefully as long as their interests are not threatened. A threat to our interests leads to a natural in-group bias in favor of the groups we belong to and an out-group bias against members of other groups. Bias engages when there is some kind of a perceived interdependence, the belief that members of different categories will act for or against their self-interest. “Perceived interdependence is produced by the perception of a threat of a negative outcome from dissimilar category others or a promise of positive outcomes from similar category others; either of these leads to increased self-interest concerns.” The potential for benefit or harm directed at a category acts as a trigger for in group/out group bias, and bias is only engaged in the context of that threat. In order for bias to engage, people must experience a threat to their interests from another group, which would lead to competition and
State law enforcement officers were required to check on the immigration status of individuals whenever there was reasonable doubt that the person is here lawfully. They could arrest people on these grounds, and suspects would not be released unless their immigration status was confirmed. If an individual was found to be an illegal immigrant, they would be transferred to the custody of Federal immigration authorities. Some states also tried to follow Arizona’s path and enforce their immigration rules.
This law sparked protest and boycotts in many cities around America, and several lawsuits were filed against the Act. The main concern was that the actions according to the law would violate human rights of both Americans and lawful immigrants. Supporters of the law claimed that there is nothing in the law that requires racial or ethnic profiling, nor does it allow for arrests without a cause. Protesters believed that this would lead to widespread racial profiling and discrimination against Latinos. After a six year battle some of the requirements were challenged and relaxed, but anti-immigrant sentiment …show more content…
People belonging to different groups can live together peacefully as long as their interests are not threatened. A threat to our interests leads to a natural in-group bias in favor of the groups we belong to and an out-group bias against members of other groups. Bias engages when there is some kind of a perceived interdependence, the belief that members of different categories will act for or against their self-interest. “Perceived interdependence is produced by the perception of a threat of a negative outcome from dissimilar category others or a promise of positive outcomes from similar category others; either of these leads to increased self-interest concerns.” The potential for benefit or harm directed at a category acts as a trigger for in group/out group bias, and bias is only engaged in the context of that threat. In order for bias to engage, people must experience a threat to their interests from another group, which would lead to competition and