In multiethnic nation-states experiencing new flows of immigrants, political officials and citizens alike have expressed hostility in the form of demonstrations, campaigns, vandalism, and even policies. Yet local communities have also displayed public support for immigrants in the form of protests and advocacy efforts. Past literature has almost exclusively focused on anti-immigrant activity, using theories of group threat and competition, which suggest that new influxes or large concentrations of immigrants should prompt dominant groups to protect their interests, leading to anti-immigrant attitudes and behaviors. We extend the literature by focusing on pro-immigrant behavior, which we define as efforts initiated by established local residents and organizations to include immigrants in the larger community and/or to improve the lives of immigrants. In contrast to theories of group threat, we put forth the group inclusion model, and contend that demographic and political “threats” operate to break down rather than bolster group boundaries. We also find that when the increasing demographic and political presence of immigrants is coupled with the visibility of immigration, immigrant inclusion thrives. Using a data set of pro-immigrant collective action across 52 U.S. metropolitan areas, we generally find support for our model, and discuss the broader implications for immigrant–native relations.
AndrewsK. T. (2002). Movement-countermovement dynamics and the emergence of new institutions: The case of “White Flight” schools in Mississippi. Social Forces, 80, 911-936.
3.
BarronD. N. (1992). The analysis of count data: Overdispersion and autocorrelation. Sociological Methodology, 22, 179-220.
4.
Benjamin-AlvaradoJ. B.DeSipioL.MontoyaC. (2009). Latino mobilization in new immigrant destinations: The anti-H.R. 4437 protest in Nebraska’s cities. Urban Affairs Review, 44, 718-735.
5.
BinderJ.ZagefkaH.BrownR.FunkeF.KesslerT.MummendeyA.. . . LeyensJ.-P. (2009). Does contact reduce prejudice or does prejudice reduce contact? A longitudinal test of the contact hypothesis among majority and minority groups in three European countries. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 843-856.
6.
BlalockH. M. (1967). Toward a theory of minority-group relations. New York, NY: Wiley.
7.
BlumerH. (1958). Race prejudice as a sense of group position. Pacific Sociological Review, 1, 3-7.
8.
BoboL.HutchingsV. L. (1996). Perceptions of racial group competition: Extending Blumer’s theory of group position to a multiracial social context. American Sociological Review, 61, 951-972.
9.
BohmanA. (2011). Articulated antipathies: Political influence on anti-immigrant attitudes. International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 52, 457-477.
10.
BonacichE. (1972). A theory of ethnic antagonism: The split labor market. American Sociological Review, 37, 547-559.
11.
BoomgaardenH. G.VliegenthartR. (2007). Explaining the rise of anti-immigrant parties: The role of news media content. Electoral Studies, 26, 404-417.
12.
BoomgaardenH. G.VliegenthartR. (2009). How news content influences anti-immigration attitudes: Germany, 1993–2005. European Journal of Political Research, 48, 516-542.
13.
BraderT.ValentinoN. A.JardinaA. E. (2009). Immigration opinion in a time of economic crisis: Material interests versus group attitudes (American Political Science Association 2009 Toronto Meeting Paper). Retrieved from http://ssrn.com/abstract=1449415
14.
BrownH. (2010). They must be discontented: Racial threat, black mobilization, and the passage of school closing policies. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 33, 1392-1411.
15.
BurnsP.GimpelJ. G. (2000). Economic insecurity, prejudicial stereotypes, and public opinion on immigration policy. Political Science Quarterly, 115, 201-225.
16.
CampbellA. L.WongC.CitrinJ. (2006). Racial threat, partisan climate, and direct democracy: Contextual effects in three California initiatives. Political Behavior, 28, 129-150.
17.
ChandlerC. R.TsaiY.-M. (2001). Social factors influencing immigration attitudes: An analysis of data from the general social survey. Social Science Journal, 38, 177-188.
18.
ChavezJ. M.ProvineD. M. (2009). Race and the response of state legislatures to unauthorized immigrants. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 623, 78-92.
19.
CitrinJ.GreenD. P.MusteC.WongC. (1997). Public opinion toward immigration reform: The role of economic motivations. Journal of Politics, 59, 858-881.
20.
CitrinJ.SidesJ. (2008). Immigration and the imagined community in Europe and the United States. Political Studies, 56, 33-56.
21.
CulverL. (2004). The impact of new immigration patterns on the provision of police services in Midwestern communities. Journal of Criminal Justice, 32, 329-344.
22.
DunawayJ.BrantonR. P.AbrajanoM. A. (2010). Agenda setting, public opinion, and the issue of immigration reform. Social Science Quarterly, 91, 359-378.
23.
DunnT. J.AragonésA. M.ShiversG. (2005). Recent Mexican migration in the rural Delmarva Peninsula: Human rights versus citizenship rights in a local context. In ZúñigaV.Hernández-LiónR. (Eds.), New destinations: Mexican immigration in the United States (pp. 155-183). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
24.
EarlJ.MartinA.McCarthyJ. D.SouleS. A. (2004). The use of newspaper data in the study of collective action. Annual Review of Sociology, 30, 65-80.
25.
EbertK.EstradaE. P.LoreM. H. (2014). When organizations matter: Threatening demographics, supportive politics, and immigration lawmaking. Du Bois Review: Social Science Research on Race, 11, 387-417.
26.
EbertK.OkamotoD. G. (2013). Social citizenship, integration and collective action: Immigrant civic engagement in the United States. Social Forces, 91, 1267-1292.
27.
EbertK.OkamotoD. G. (2015). Legitimating contexts, immigrant power, and exclusionary actions. Social Problems, 62, 40-67.
28.
EspenshadeT. J.HempsteadK. (1996). Contemporary American attitudes toward US immigration. International Migration Review, 30, 535-570.
29.
FennellyK. (2008). Prejudice toward immigrants in the Midwest. In MasseyD. (Ed.), New faces in new places: The changing geography of American immigration (pp. 151-178). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
30.
FennellyK.FedericoC. (2008). Rural residence as a determinant of attitudes toward US immigration policy. International Migration, 46(1), 151-190.
31.
FetzerJ. S. (2000). Public attitudes toward immigration in the United States, France, and Germany. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
32.
FetzerJ. S. (2011). The evolution of public attitudes toward immigration in Europe and the United States, 2000-2010 (EU-US Immigration Systems 2011/10). San Domenico di Fiesole, Italy: Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies.
33.
FloresR. D. (2014). Living in the eye of the storm how did Hazleton’s restrictive immigration ordinance affect local interethnic relations?American Behavioral Scientist, 58, 1743-1763.
34.
GarcíaA. S. (2014). Hidden in plain sight: How unauthorised migrants strategically assimilate in restrictive localities in California. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 40, 1895-1914.
35.
Geolytics. (2003). CensusCD Neighborhood Change Database (NCDB): 1970-2000 US Census tract data. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
36.
GimpelJ. G.Celeste LayJ. (2008). Political socialization and reactions to immigration-related diversity in rural America. Rural Sociology, 73, 180-204.
37.
GleesonS. (2008). Organizing for Latino immigrant labor rights in two US cities: The case of San Jose and Houston. In RamakrishnanK.BloemraadI. (Eds.), Civic hopes and political realities: Immigrants, community organizations, and political engagement (pp. 107-133). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
38.
GraefeD. R.De JongG. F.HallM.SturgeonS.VanEerdenJ. (2008). Immigrants’ TANF eligibility 1996-2003: What explains the new across-state inequalities?International Migration Review, 42, 89-133.
39.
GreyM. A.ConradA.BoydM.WoodrickA. C. (2001). Marshalltown New Iowans Pilot Community Assessment: A Report to the Marshalltown New Iowans Pilot Community Steering Committee. Cedar Falls: University of Northern Iowa Institute for Decision Making.
40.
GreyM. A.WoodrickA. C. (2005). Latinos have revitalized our community: Mexican migration and Anglo responses in Marshalltown, Iowa. In ZúñigaV.Hernández-LiónR. (Eds.), New destinations: Mexican immigration in the United States (pp. 133-152). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
41.
GriffithD. (2008). New Midwesterners, new Southerners: Immigration experiences in four rural American settings. In MasseyD. S. (Ed.), New faces in new places: The changing geography of American immigration (pp. 179-210). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
42.
HaubertJ.FussellE. (2006). Explaining pro-immigrant sentiment in the U.S.: Social class, cosmopolitanism, and perceptions of immigrants. International Migration Review, 40, 489-507.
43.
HawleyG. (2011). Political threat and immigration: Party identification, demographic context, and immigration policy preference. Social Science Quarterly, 92, 404-422.
44.
HerdaD. (2010). How many immigrants?Public Opinion Quarterly, 74, 674.
45.
HockeP. (1999). Determining the selection bias in local and national newspaper reports on protest events. In RuchtD.KoopmansR.NeidhartF. (Eds.), Acts of dissent: New developments in the study of protest (pp. 131-163). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
46.
HopkinsD. J. (2010). Politicized places: Explaining where and when immigrants provoke local opposition. American Political Science Review, 104, 1-21.
47.
IronsJ. (2010). Reconstituting whiteness: The Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press.
48.
JackmanM. R.CraneM. (1986). “Some of my best friends are black . . .”: Interracial friendship and Whites’ racial attitudes. Public Opinion Quarterly, 50, 459-486.
49.
JackmanR. W.VolpertK. (1996). Conditions favouring parties of the extreme right in Western Europe. British Journal of Political Science, 26, 501-521.
50.
JacobsD.CarmichaelJ. T. (2002). The political sociology of the death penalty: A pooled time-series analysis. American Sociological Review, 67, 109-131.
51.
JensenL. (2006). New immigrant settlements in rural America: Problems, prospects, and policies. Durham, NH: Carsey Institute.
52.
Jones-CorreaM. (Ed.). (2001). Governing American cities: Inter-ethnic coalitions, competition, and conflict. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
53.
Jones-CorreaM. (2005, February3-5). The bureaucratic incorporation of immigrants in suburbia. Presented at the Russell Sage Foundation Conference on Immigration to the United States: New Sources and Destinations, White Hall, Ithaca, NY.
54.
Jones-CorreaM. (2011). All immigration is local: Receiving communities and their role in successful immigrant integration. Washington, DC: Center for American Progress.
55.
KoopmansR.RuchtD. (2002). Protest event analysis. In Methods of social movement research. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
56.
KoopmansR.StathamP.GiugniM.PassyF. (2005). Contested citizenship: Immigration and cultural diversity in Europe. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
57.
LahavG. (2004). Immigration and politics in the New Europe. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
58.
LaPiereR. T. (1934). Attitudes vs. actions. Social Forces, 13, 230-237.
59.
LarsenS. (2007). The anti-immigration movement: From shovels to suits. NACLA Report on the Americas, 40(3), 14.
60.
MarrowH. B. (2008). Hispanic immigration, black population size, and intergroup relations in the rural and small-town South. In MasseyD. (Ed.), New faces in new places: The changing geography of American immigration (pp. 211-248). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
61.
MarrowH. (2011). New destination dreaming: Immigration, race, and legal status in the rural American South. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
62.
MarrowH. B. (2012). Deserving to a point: Unauthorized immigrants in San Francisco’s universal access healthcare model. Social Science & Medicine, 74, 846-854.
63.
MaydaA. M. (2006). Who is against immigration? A cross-country investigation of individual attitudes toward immigrants. Review of Economics and Statistics, 88, 510-530.
64.
MazzoleniG. (2003). The media and the growth of neo-populism in contemporary democracies. In MazzoleniG.StewartJ.HorsfieldB. (Eds.), The media and neo-populism: A contemporary comparative analysis (pp. 5-24). Westport, CT: Praeger.
65.
McAdamD.SuY. (2002). The war at home: Antiwar protests and congressional voting, 1965 to 1973. American Sociological Review, 67, 696-721.
66.
McCarthyJ. D.McPhailC.SmithJ. (1996). Images of protest: Dimensions of selection bias in media coverage of Washington demonstrations, 1982 and 1991. American Sociological Review, 61, 478-499.
67.
McLarenL. M. (2003). Anti-immigrant prejudice in Europe: Contact, threat perception, and preferences for the exclusion of migrants. Social Forces, 81, 909-936.
68.
McVeighR. (2004). Structured ignorance and organized racism in the United States. Social Forces, 82, 895-936.
69.
MertonR. K. (1949). Discrimination and the American creed. In MacIverR. H. (Ed.), Discrimination and national welfare (pp. 99-126). New York, NY: Harper & Row.
70.
MillerW. E.SchofieldN. (2008). The transformation of the Republican and Democratic Party coalitions in the U.S. Perspectives on Politics, 6, 433-450.
71.
NakanishiD. T.LaiJ. S. (2000). National Asian Pacific American Political Almanac, 2001–2002. Los Angeles, CA: UCLA Asian American Studies Center Press.
72.
National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials Educational Fund. (2000). National Directory of Latino Elected Officials. Washington, DC: Author.
73.
NewmanB. J.JohnstonC. D.StricklandA.CitrinJ. (2012). Immigration crackdown in the American workplace: Explaining variation in e-verify policy adoption across the U.S. states. State Politics and Policy Quarterly, 12, 160-180.
74.
NewtonL. (2008). Illegal, alien, or immigrant: The politics of immigration reform. New York: New York University Press.
75.
OkamotoD.EbertK. (2010). Beyond the ballot: Immigrant collective action in gateways and new destinations. Social Problems, 57, 529-558.
76.
OliverP. E.ManeyG. M. (2000). Political processes and local newspaper coverage of protest events: From selection bias to triadic interactions. American Journal of Sociology, 106, 463-505.
77.
OliverP. E.MyersD. J. (1999). How events enter the public sphere: Conflict, location, and sponsorship in local newspaper coverage of public events. American Journal of Sociology, 105, 38-87.
78.
OlzakS. (1992). The dynamics of ethnic competition and conflict. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
79.
OlzakS.ShanahanS.WestE. (1994). School desegregation, interracial exposure, and antibusing activity in contemporary Urban America. American Journal of Sociology, 100, 196-241.
Page-GouldE.Mendoza-DentonR.Marie AlegreJ.SiyJ. (2010). Understanding the impact of cross-group friendship on interactions with novel outgroup members. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 775-793.
82.
PagerD.QuillianL. (2005). Walking the talk? What employers say versus what they do. American Sociological Review, 70, 355-380.
83.
ParkJ.IcelandJ. (2010). Residential segregation in metropolitan established immigrant gateways and new destinations, 1990-2000. Social Science Research, 40, 811-821.
84.
PereaJ. F. (Ed.). (1997). Immigrants out! The new nativism and the anti-immigrant impulse in the United States. New York: New York University Press.
85.
PettigrewT. F.TroppL. R. (2011). When groups meet. New York, NY: Psychology Press.
86.
PowersD. A.EllisonC. G. (1995). Interracial contact and black racial attitudes: The contact hypothesis and selectivity bias. Social Forces, 74, 205-226.
87.
QuillianL. (1995). Prejudice as a response to perceived group threat: Population composition and anti-immigrant and racial prejudice in Europe. American Sociological Review, 60, 586-611.
88.
QuillianL. (1996). Group threat and regional change in attitudes toward African Americans. American Journal of Sociology, 102, 816-860.
89.
RamakrishnanS. K.LewisP. (2005). Immigrants and local governance: The view from City Hall. San Francisco: Public Policy Institute of California.
90.
RamakrishnanS. K.WongT. (2010). Immigration policies go local: The varying responses of local governments to low-skilled and undocumented immigration. In VarsanyiM. (Ed.), Taking local control: Immigration policy activism in US cities and states (pp. 73-93). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
91.
RichB. L.MirandaM. (2005). The sociopolitical dynamics of Mexican immigration in Lexington, Kentucky, 1997 to 2002: An ambivalent community responds. In ZúñigaV.Hernández-LiónR. (Eds.), New destinations: Mexican immigration in the United States (pp. 187-219). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
92.
Santa AnaO. (2002). Brown tide rising, metaphors of Latinos in contemporary America public discourse. Austin: University of Texas Press.
93.
ScheveK. F.SlaughterM. J. (2001). Labor market competition and individual preferences over immigration policy. Review of Economics and Statistics, 83, 133-145.
94.
SchildkrautD. (2011, September1-3). The complicated constituency: A study of immigrant opinions about political representation. Paper presented at the American Political Science Association Annual Meeting, Seattle, WA.
95.
SchlueterE.DavidovE. (2013). Contextual sources of perceived group threat: Negative immigration-related news reports, immigrant group size and their interaction, Spain 1996-2007. European Sociological Review, 29, 179-191.
96.
SchmidtR.Sr.HeroR. E.AokiA. L.Alex-AssensohY. M. (2010). Newcomers, outsiders, and insiders: Immigrants and American racial politics in the early twenty-first century. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
97.
SemyonovM.RaijmanR.GorodzeiskyA. (2006). The rise of anti-foreigner sentiment in European Societies, 1988-2000. American Sociological Review, 71, 436-449.
98.
ShanahanE. A.McBethM. K.HathawayP. L.ArnellR. J. (2008). Conduit or contributor? The role of media in policy change theory. Policy Sciences, 41, 115-138.
99.
ShultzB. J. (2008). Inside the gilded cage: The lives of Latino immigrant males in rural Central Kentucky. Southeastern Geographer, 48, 201-218.
100.
ShutikaD. L. (2008). The ambivalent welcome: Cinco de Mayo and the symbolic expression of local identity and ethnic relations. In MasseyD. (Ed.), New faces in new places: The changing geography of American immigration (pp. 274-307). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
101.
SigelmanL.BledsoeT.WelchS.CombsM. W. (1996). Making contact? Black-white social interaction in an urban setting. American Journal of Sociology, 101, 1306-1332.
102.
SizemoreD. S. (2004). Ethnic inclusion and exclusion: Managing the language of Hispanic integration in a rural community. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 33, 534-570.
103.
SmithJ.McCarthyJ. D.McPhailC.AugustynB. (2001). From protest to agenda building: Description bias in media coverage of protest events in Washington, D.C. Social Forces, 79, 1397-1423.
104.
SnowD. A.SouleS. A.CressD. M. (2005). Identifying the precipitants of homeless protest across 17 U.S. cities, 1980 to 1990. Social Forces, 83, 1183-1210.
105.
SonensheinR. J. (2001). When ideologies agree and interests collide, what’s a leader to do? The prospects for Latino-Jewish coalition in Los Angeles. In Jones-CorreaM. (Ed.), Governing American cities: Interethnic coalitions, competition, and conflict (pp. 201-229). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
106.
SouleS. A.Van DykeN. (1999). Black Church arson in the United States, 1989-1996. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 22, 724-742.
107.
TarrowS. (1989). Democracy and disorder: Protest and politics in Italy, 1965–1975. Oxford, England: Clarendon.
ValentinoN. A.BraderT.JardinaA. E. (2013). Immigration opposition among US Whites: General ethnocentrism or media priming of attitudes about Latinos?Political Psychology, 34, 149-166.
110.
VarsanyiM. W. (2011). Neoliberalism and nativism: Local anti-immigrant policy activism and an emerging politics of scale. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 35, 295-311.
111.
VossK.BloemraadI. (2011). Rallying for immigrant rights: The fight for inclusion in 21st century America. Berkeley: University of California Press.
112.
WalgraveS.de SwertK. (2004). The making of the (issues of the) Vlaams Blok: The media and the success of the Belgian extreme right party. Political Communication, 21, 479-500.
113.
WatersM. C.JiménezT. R. (2005). Assessing immigrant assimilation: New empirical and theoretical challenges. Annual Review of Sociology, 31, 105-125.
114.
WatsonB. R.RiffeD. (2013). Perceived threat, immigration policy support, and media coverage: Hostile media and presumed influence. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 25, 459-479.
115.
WelchS.SigelmanL. (2000). Getting to know you? Latino-Anglo social contact. Social Science Quarterly, 81, 67-83.
116.
WilkesR.GuppyN.FarrisL. (2008). “No thanks, we’re full”: Individual characteristics, national context, and changing attitudes toward immigration. International Migration Review, 42, 302-329.
117.
WooldridgeJ. M. (2002). Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data. Cambridge: MIT Press.
118.
WrightM.CitrinJ. (2011). Saved by the stars and stripes? Images of protest, salience of threat, and immigration attitudes. American Politics Research, 39, 323-343.
119.
YanceyG. (1999). An examination of the effects of residential and church integration on racial attitudes of whites. Sociological Perspectives, 42, 279-304.
