As immigrant rights movements and anti-immigrant mobilizations engage in contentious battles for public support, it is increasingly essential to understand how these opposing political forces develop strategic alliances, garnering power, and shaping larger debates around immigration. Using newspaper data, this study compares case studies of immigrant rights and nativist battles in two mobilizations—the 2012 “No Papers, No Fear Ride for Justice” during the Obama Era and the 2018 “Family Separation Protests” during the Trump Era—to analyze how movements and counter-movements strategically deploy frames to generate or disrupt strategic alliances. Findings identify strategic racial frame deployment as a mechanism that can either amplify or obfuscate racial meanings, enabling, and constraining counter-frames by rival movements. I highlight patterns in how these racial frames are used in framing contests to bring groups together in alliances or wedge groups apart, illuminating the underlying system of racialization as it shapes intergroup boundaries, its limits, and its radical possibilities for transformation.
AbbottA. (1990). Conceptions of time and events in social science methods: Causal and narrative approaches. Historical Methods: A Journal of Quantitative and Interdisciplinary History, 23(4), 140–150. https://doi.org/10.1080/01615440.1990.10594204
2.
ArmstrongE. A.BernsteinM. (2008). Culture, power, and institutions: A multi-institutional politics approach to social movements*. Sociological Theory, 26(1), 74–99. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9558.2008.00319.x
3.
AslaniS.KingB. G.ForoughiH. (2013). Framing, resonance, and micro-mobilization: Shall we say what we are for, or what we are against?Academy of Management Proceedings, 2013(1), 17170. https://doi.org/10.5465/ambpp.2013.163
4.
BellD. A. (1995). Who’s afraid of critical race theory. University of Illinois Law Review, 893.
5.
BenfordR. D.SnowD. A. (2000). Framing processes and social movements: An overview and assessment. Annual Review of Sociology, 26(1), 611–639. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.26.1.611
6.
BernsteinM. (2013). Power, politics and social movements: A multi-institutional politics approach. Politics, Groups, and Identities, 1(1), 87–93. https://doi.org/10.1080/21565503.2013.760309
7.
BlochK. R. (2014). ‘Anyone can be an illegal’: Color-blind ideology and maintaining latino/citizen borders. Critical Sociology, 40(1), 47–65. https://doi.org/10.1177/0896920512466274
8.
BloemraadI.SilvaF.VossK. (2016). Rights, economics, or family? Frame resonance, political ideology, and the immigrant rights movement. Social Forces, 94(4), 1647–1674. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/sov123
9.
Bonilla-SilvaE. (2013). Racism without racists: Color-blind racism and the persistence of racial inequality in America. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
10.
BoomgaardenH. G.VliegenthartR. (2007). Explaining the rise of anti-immigrant parties: The role of news media content. Electoral Studies, 26(2), 404–417. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2006.10.018
BraceyG.ChambersC.LavelleK.MuellerJ. C. (2017). The white racial frame: A roundtable discussion. In Thompson-MillerR.DuceyK. (Eds.), Systemic racism: Making liberty, justice, and democracy real (pp. 41–75). Palgrave Macmillan US. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-59410-5_3
13.
BrooksE.EbertK.FlockhartT. (2017). Examining the reach of color blindness: Ideological flexibility, frame alignment, and legitimacy among racially conservative and extremist organizations. The Sociological Quarterly, 58(2), 254–276. https://doi.org/10.1080/00380253.2017.1296340
14.
BrownH. E. (2013). Race, legality, and the social policy consequences of anti-immigration mobilization. American Sociological Review, 78(2), 290–314. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122413476712
15.
BrownH.JonesJ. A. (2015). Rethinking panethnicity and the race-immigration divide: An ethnoracialization model of group formation. Sociology of Race and Ethnicity, 1(1), 181–191. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332649214558304
CarterJ. S.LippardC.BairdA. F. (2019). Veiled threats: Color-blind frames and group threat in affirmative action discourse. Social Problems, 66(4), 503–518. https://doi.org/10.1093/socpro/spy020
18.
CollinsP. H.BilgeS. (2016). Intersectionality. John Wiley & Sons.
19.
CorbinJ.StraussA. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.
20.
CrenshawK. (1995). Critical race theory: The key writings that formed the movement. New Press. Distributed by W.W. Norton & Co.
21.
DelgadoR.StefancicJ. (2017). Critical race theory: an introduction. (3rd ed.). NYU Press.
22.
EbertK.LiaoW.EstradaE. P. (2020). Apathy and color-blindness in privatized immigration control. Sociology of Race and Ethnicity, 6(4), 533–547. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332649219846140
23.
EbertK.OkamotoD. (2015). Legitimating contexts, immigrant power, and exclusionary actions. Social Problems, 61(2), 40–60. https://doi.org/10.1093/socpro/spu006
24.
EnriquezL. E. (2014). “Undocumented and citizen students unite”: Building a cross-status coalition through Shared ideology. Social Problems, 61(2), 155–174. https://doi.org/10.1525/sp.2014.12032
25.
FeaginJ. R. (2010). The white racial frame: Centuries of racial framing and counter-framing. Routledge.
26.
GilliamF. D.IyengarS. (2000). Prime suspects: The influence of local television news on the viewing public. American Journal of Political Science, 44(3), 560–573. https://doi.org/10.2307/2669264
27.
GoffmanE. (1986). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. Northeastern University Press.
28.
GriffinL. J. (1992). Temporality, events, and explanation in historical sociology an introduction. Sociological Methods & Research, 20(4), 403–427. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124192020004001
29.
JohnstonH.NoakesJ. A. (2005). Frames of protest: Social movements and the framing perspective. Rowman & Littlefield.
30.
JonesJ. A. (2019). The browning of the new South. University of Chicago Press.
LawrenceR. G. (2006). Seeing the whole board: New institutional analysis of news content. Political Communication, 23(2), 225–230. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584600600629851
33.
LunaZ. (2016). “Truly a women of color organization”: Negotiating sameness and difference in pursuit of intersectionality. Gender & Society, 30(5), 769–790. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243216649929
34.
McCammonH. J. (2012). Explaining frame variation: More moderate and radical demands for women’s citizenship in the U.S. Women’s Jury movements. Social Problems, 59(1), 43–69. https://doi.org/10.1525/sp.2012.59.1.43
35.
MeyerD. S.StaggenborgS. (1996). Movements, countermovements, and the structure of political opportunity. American Journal of Sociology, 101(6), 1628-1660. https://doi.org/10.1086/230869.
36.
MeyerD. S.WhittierN.RobnettB. (2002). Social movements: Identity, culture, and the state. Oxford University Press.
37.
MoraG. C. (2014). Making Hispanics: How activists, bureaucrats, and media constructed a new American. University of Chicago Press.
38.
MuellerJ. C. (2017). Producing colorblindness: Everyday mechanisms of white ignorance. Social Problems, 64(2), 219–238. https://doi.org/10.1093/socpro/spw061
39.
MuellerJ. C. (2020). Racial ideology or racial ignorance? An alternative theory of racial cognition. Sociological Theory, 38(2), 142–169. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735275120926197
40.
NaberN. C. (2002). So our history doesn’t become your future: The local and global politics of coalition building post september 11th. Journal of Asian American Studies, 5(3), 217–242. https://doi.org/10.1353/jaas.2003.0019
41.
OkamotoD. G. (2006). Institutional panethnicity: Boundary Formation in Asian-American organizing. Social Forces, 85(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1353/sof.2006.0136
42.
OkamotoD.EbertK. (2016). Group boundaries, immigrant inclusion, and the politics of immigrant–native relations. American Behavioral Scientist, 60(2), 224–250. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764215607580
43.
OmiM.WinantH. (2014). Racial formation in the United States. Routledge.
44.
PortesA.ZhouM. (1993). The new second generation: Segmented assimilation and its variants. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 530(1), 74–96. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716293530001006
TerriquezV.BrenesT.LopezA. (2018). Intersectionality as a multipurpose collective action frame: The case of the undocumented youth movement. Ethnicities, 18(2), 260–276. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468796817752558
49.
TreitlerV. B. (2013). The ethnic project: Transforming racial fiction into ethnic factions. Stanford University Press.
WingfieldA. H. (2017). Legal outsiders, strategic toughness: Racial frames and counter-frame in the legal profession. In Thompson-MillerR.DuceyK. (Eds.), Systemic racism: Making liberty, justice, and democracy real (pp. 185–202). Palgrave Macmillan US. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-59410-5_8
52.
YazdihaH. (2014). Law as movement strategy: How the Islamophobia movement institutionalizes fear through legislation. Social Movement Studies, 13(2), 267–274. https://doi.org/10.1080/14742837.2013.807730
53.
YazdihaH. (2017). The legacies of the civil rights movement and the paradoxical politics of inclusion: Collective memory in contentious politics. UNC Chapel Hill.
54.
YazdihaH. (2020). All the muslims fit to print: Racial frames as mechanisms of muslim ethnoracial formation in the New York Times from 1992 to 2010. Sociology of Race and Ethnicity, 6(4), 501–516. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332649220903747
55.
ZamoraS.OsujiC. (2014). Mobilizing African Americans for immigrant rights: Framing strategies in two multi-racial coalitions. Latino Studies, 12(3), 424–448. https://doi.org/10.1057/lst.2014.47
56.
Zepeda-MillánC. (2017). Latino mass mobilization: Immigration, racialization, and activism. Cambridge University Press.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
