Support for Tough Immigration Policy: Identity Defense or Concern for Law and Order?

• Published in: Journal of social issues 2018-12, Vol.74 (4), p.700-715
• Main Authors: Mukherjee, Sahana, Adams, Glenn, Molina, Ludwin E.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Appropriateness; Ethnic identity; Identity; Immigration policy; Law; Law enforcement; Police; Public opinion; Speeding; Traffic; Trust; Violations
• ISSN: 0022-4537; 1540-4560
• DOI: 10.1111/josi.12294

Across two studies, U.S. participants read a fictional transcript of a law enforcement officer who observed a speeding infraction and made a discretionary traffic stop. The car carried occupants who displayed either high or low fit with Anglocentric constructions of U.S. identity and were of presumptive Mexican (Studies 1 and 2), Canadian (Study 1), or Irish (Study 2) origin. The officer decided over the course of the traffic stop that the occupants’ behavior aroused “reasonable suspicion” about documentation status, so he asked them to produce identification documents and detained them when they failed to do so. Participants indicated their suspicion about occupants’ documentation status and rated the appropriateness of law enforcement actions. Results indicate effects of origin across both studies for all outcomes: participants considered occupants of Mexican origin (vs. Canadian or Irish) as more suspicious, and rated law enforcement actions related to traffic and immigration violations as more appropriate when the interaction involved occupants of Mexican origin (vs. Canadian or Irish). Results indicate effects of fit across both studies for all outcomes: participants considered occupants who showed low‐fit (vs. high‐fit) as more suspicious, and rated law enforcement actions related to traffic and immigration violations as more appropriate when occupants showed low‐fit (vs. high‐fit). Discussion focuses on how participant support for punitive anti‐immigration measures is less about neutral enforcement of law than about racialized exclusion to defend an Anglocentric construction of U.S. identity.