DOWNLOAD A FREE DIGITAL COPY

Immigration is viewed as both essential to American society and a polarizing political issue. Recent flashpoints include a Supreme Court decision upholding, for now, the legality of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) for young, undocumented immigrants. The Trump administration has limited visas for foreign workers, banned travelers from predominantly Muslim countries, narrowed asylum-seeking procedures, and increased immigration enforcement. In this issue of RSF, edited by demographer Katharine M. Donato and economist Catalina Amuedo-Dorantes, an interdisciplinary group of scholars traces the history and contemporary landscape of legal immigration to the United States.

Donato and Amuedo-Dorantes outline U.S. immigration policies from 1880 to the present. They underscore that many recent immigration practices result from presidential executive orders rather than legislative acts, and that these orders have led to an exclusionary system that makes all immigrants, not only those entering without documentation, vulnerable.

Contributors to the issue investigate the ways in which immigrants secure visas and citizenship, including through work and family ties, and special statuses for military veterans, refugees, asylum seekers, and unaccompanied minors. Daniel Costa suggests the temporary worker visa system favors employers over immigrant workers, who may not complain about unfair labor practices because they fear job loss or deportation. Pia Orrenius and Madeline Zavodny show how improved economic conditions have led to employer demand for temporary work visas, creating a viable alternative to hiring unauthorized workers. Julia Gelatt compares multiple classes of legal immigrants, and reveals employer-sponsored immigrants are better educated, exhibit higher English proficiency, and work in more highly skilled jobs than others such as family-sponsored, humanitarian, and diversity visa immigrants.

Other contributors examine immigrants’ experiences with special statuses. Cara Wong and Jonathan Bonaguro find that Americans are more likely to support a path to citizenship via military service if immigrants enter with appropriate documentation, but many believe that undocumented migrants should be barred from the military and other public services. Van C. Tran and Francisco Lara-García show that schooling and employment, along with strategic financial, community building, and other support services, are critical factors in the successful integration of refugees. Luis Edward Tenorio finds the patchwork of institutions that adjudicate laws for children with special immigrant juvenile status hampers the integration of unaccompanied minors.

This issue of RSF is a timely contribution that will invigorate the field of scholarly work on the American legal immigration system.

DOWNLOAD A FREE DIGITAL COPY

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, often referred to as the ACA or Obamacare, was enacted in 2010 in the wake of the Great Recession. The law transformed the way that Americans access healthcare, nearly halving the ranks of the 49 million uninsured Americans. Edited by political scientist Andrea Louise Campbell and economist Lara Shore-Sheppard, this issue of RSF examines the social, political, and economic effects of this landmark legislation.

Contributors Helen Levy, Andrew Ying, and Nicholas Bagley argue that despite repeated efforts at repeal, over 80 percent of the Act has been implemented as it was originally intended. Julianna Pacheco, Jake Haselswerdt, and Jamila Michener show that when Republican governors support Medicaid expansion, Republican voters become more favorable toward the ACA, and polarization between Republican and Democrat voters decreases. Yet Charles Courtemanche, James Marton, and Aaron Yelowitz find little impact of the ACA on voter participation. Lisa Beauregard and Edward Miller examine states’ adoption of the ACA’s home and community-based care services for the elderly and people with disabilities, finding that states with more liberal elected officials and more fiscal capacity were more likely to adopt these provisions. Paul Shafer and coauthors probe the role of different types of health insurance and political advertising on insurance enrollment. Richard Fording and Dana Patton explain the emergence of contentious Medicaid work requirements and patient copays that limit access to Medicaid.

Other contributors address how the ACA affects marginalized populations. Carrie Fry, Thomas McGuire, and Richard Frank link Medicaid expansion to lower rates of recidivism among the formerly incarcerated. Radhika Gore and coauthors study primary care practices serving South Asian immigrants in New York City and highlight the importance of social context and organizational constraints in designing population health interventions. The issue also examines the economic effects of the ACA, especially on access to private and public health insurance. Both Mark Hall and Jean Abraham study instability in ACA health insurance markets, with Hall focusing on uncertainty arising from political factors and Abraham examining the factors that lead local markets to face high premiums and low insurer participation. Philip Rocco and Andrew Kelly explore the mechanisms included in the ACA to try to spur innovations in care delivery that both improve health and generate long-term cost savings.

As the COVID-19 pandemic affects healthcare in unprecedented ways, affordable healthcare access is critical. This RSF journal issue offers a timely, thoughtful consideration of one of the most pressing issues in American life.

DOWNLOAD A FREE DIGITAL COPY

Inmate labor fuels prisons. The incarcerated work in prison industries that collaborate with private corporations. Fair labor laws do not apply to prisons, where it is common for inmates to earn less than one dollar per hour. But involvement with the criminal justice system continues to shape and hinder the future employment and earnings of the formerly incarcerated long after they have been released. In this issue of RSF, edited by sociologist Sandra Susan Smith and legal scholar Jonathan Simon, an interdisciplinary group of scholars analyze how the criminal justice system acts as a de facto labor market institution by compelling or coercing labor from the justice-involved.

The social and economic effects of criminal justice involvement are widespread, with almost seven million people under some form of direct supervision. The contributors to this issue examine how the criminal justice system affects the livelihood and families of both the incarcerated and formerly incarcerated. Cody Warner, Joshua Kaiser, and Jason Houle explore how “hidden sentences” – restricted access to voting rights, public housing, and professional licensing – negatively impact labor market outcomes for young adults with criminal records. Michele Cadigan and Garbriela Kirk look at the burden of court fees and fines, or legal financial obligations, that place a strain on the work commitments and resources of low-income people. Joe LaBriola sheds new light on how employment affects recidivism; he shows that parolees who find high-quality jobs, such as in the manufacturing industry, are less likely to return to prison than those employed in low-quality jobs. Noah Zatz and Michael Stoll demonstrate how the threat of imprisonment for nonpayment of child support coerces labor among noncustodial fathers, particularly African-American men. Allison Dwyer Emory and her coauthors show that previously incarcerated fathers are less likely to pay either formal or informal cash child support or offer in-kind assistance to their children’s mothers.

This issue of RSF is a timely contribution to the field of scholarly literature that illuminates the far and often destructive reach that the criminal justice system has on those whose lives it touches. It advances our understanding of how the system functions as a labor market institution and the price it extracts from those involved with it.

DOWNLOAD A FREE DIGITAL COPY

Wealth—a household’s assets minus its debts—is an important indicator of child well-being. Higher household wealth is related to better academic achievement, behavior, and health among children. Yet a sizeable share of U.S. children, including a majority of Black and Hispanic children, grow up in households with very low levels of wealth, and wealth inequality among households with children is rising even faster than among the general population. This volume of RSF, edited by social policy experts Christina Gibson-Davis and Heather Hill, provides the first comprehensive examination of the contours and consequences of wealth inequality for children under the age of 18. The contributors consider the vast racial and ethnic disparities in wealth and how those disparities affect child well-being.

Contributors Fabian Pfeffer and Nora Waitkus find that child wealth inequality is far worse in the U.S. than in other industrialized countries. Editors Gibson-Davis and Hill show that a relatively small group of American parents—mostly White—control the lion’s share of wealth, with Black and Hispanic parents having only pennies on the dollar for every dollar of White parental wealth. Nina Bandelj and Angelina Grigoryeva show how White parents with above median wealth are more likely than other parents to practice “financially intensive parenting,” saving and borrowing in ways that promote child achievement. Portia Miller and colleagues demonstrate that family wealth is related to both academic and behavioral development throughout childhood and adolescence and that wealth helps buffer the negative effects of low family income. Jordan Conwell and Leafia Zi Ye find equalizing wealth is not sufficient to eliminate race- and ethnic-based gaps in academic achievement: even among families with the same levels of wealth, Black and Hispanic children often have significantly worse scores than Whites.

High levels of childhood wealth inequality are not inevitable; they are the consequence of laws and practices that favor wealth accumulation among few, primarily White, families. Studies by Margot Jackson and colleagues and by Katherine Michelmore and Leonard Lopoo find that large-scale income-support programs, the EITC and Medicaid, have positive spillovers onto asset accumulation, but policies designed to fundamentally alter the distribution of wealth among families with children will require more expansive changes to the tax code and program asset caps.

This issue of RSF expands our understanding of wealth inequality and its effects on children, and provides important insights into policies and practices that either directly or indirectly boost wealth acquisition among child households.

DOWNLOAD A FREE DIGITAL COPY

Asian Americans are the fastest growing racial group in the U. S. and the only majority foreign-born group in the country. With immigration fueling most of the growth, Asians are projected to surpass Hispanics as the largest immigrant group by 2055. Yet, “Asian” is a catch-all category that masks tremendous diversity. In this issue of RSF, sociologist Jennifer Lee, political scientist Karthick Ramakrishnan, and an interdisciplinary roster of experts present nuanced narratives of Asian American integration that correct biased assumptions and dispel dated stereotypes. The result is an issue that makes an original and vital contribution to social science research on this under-studied population.

Rather than treating Asian Americans as a monolithic group, the contributors use the 2016 National Asian American Survey to pinpoint areas of convergence and divergence within the U.S. Asian population. Despite their diversity, Asian Americans share many attitudes, behavior, and experiences in ways that exceed expectations based on socioeconomic status alone. This paradox—of convergence despite divergence in national origins and socioeconomic status—is the animating question of this issue of RSF. Contributors Janelle Wong and Sono Shah find strong political consensus within the Asian American population, particularly with regard to a robust government role in setting public policies ranging from environmental protection to gun control to higher taxation and social service provision, and even affirmative action. Analyzing where policy opinions converge and diverge, Sunmin Kim finds that while many Asian Americans support government interventions in health care, education, and racial justice, some diverge sharply with regard to Muslim immigration. Lucas G. Drouhot and Filiz Garip construct a novel typology of five subgroups of Asian immigrants spanning class, gender, region, and immigrant generation to show how different subgroups contend with the effects of racialzed othering and inclusion simultaneously at play. Van C. Tran and Natasha Warikoo analyze both interracial and intra-Asian attitudes toward immigration and find diversity among Asians’ views by national origin: as labor migrants, Filipinos support Congress increasing the number of annual work visas; as economic migrants, Chinese and Indians support an increase in annual family visas; and as refugees, Vietnamese are least supportive of pro-immigration policies.

By turning a lens on the diverse U.S. Asian population, this issue of RSF unveils comprehensive, compelling narratives about Asian Americans and advances our understanding of race and immigrant integration in the 21st century.

DOWNLOAD A FREE DIGITAL COPY

The notorious Supreme Court decision Plessy v. Ferguson made state-sanctioned racial segregation the law of the land in 1896. While the civil rights movement and subsequent Supreme Court decisions in the twentieth century did much to mitigate its effects, its consequences reverberate in ways large and small today. This volume of RSF revisits the legacy of the decision on its 125th anniversary to consider the connection between constitutionally imposed segregation, institutionalized white supremacy, and enduring racial inequality. Edited by john a. powell, Samuel L. Myers, and Susan T. Gooden—eminent scholars in constitutional law, economics, and public administration respectively—the volume includes contributions from an interdisciplinary roster of experts, each offering fresh insights on the doctrine of “separate but equal” as it relates to citizenship, colorism, and civil rights in the United States.

The contributors grapple with a central overarching question: How is it that a court decision from 125 years ago still has such an enduring impact on racial disparities? john a. powell provides a nuanced overview of the legal context of the case to show that segregation was not only about separating people by race but primarily about preserving white supremacy. The wide latitude for judicial interpretation granted to judges means that who decides matters, and today, just as much as in 1896, the justices sitting on the Supreme Court matter. Thomas J. Davis discusses how control over personal identity lay at the heart of Plessy, and how its denial of basic human rights and fundamental freedoms reverberates today. From sex and marriage to adoption, gender recognition, employment, and voting, persistent discrimination turns in various degrees on state authority to define, categorize, and deny freedom of personal identity. Looking at the enduring educational impact of “separate but equal,” which was not entirely rectified by the outlawing of school segregation in Brown v. Board of Education, Dania V. Francis and William A. Darity Jr. link ongoing within-school segregation to the legacy of racialized tracking born from white resistance to desegregation. They demonstrate how a short-term, concerted effort to increase the number of Black high school students taking advanced courses could lead to long-term benefits in closing the educational achievement gap and eliminating institutionalized segregation within our schools.

This issue of RSF corrects and expands the narrative around Plessy, and provides important lessons for addressing the nation’s continuing racial travails. It is ideal for use by scholars, community leaders, and policy makers alike.

DOWNLOAD A FREE DIGITAL COPY

DOWNLOAD A FREE DIGITAL COPY

Monetary sanctions—fines, fees, costs, and other financial penalties imposed on individuals when they encounter the criminal legal system—can lead to a cascade of negative effects for individuals, families, and communities. Because people are not released from criminal legal supervision until such penalties are fully paid, monetary sanctions prolong supervision, make probation violations more likely, escalate sanctions for new criminal convictions, and can result in incarceration for nonpayment. Such debts also make it more difficult for defendants to pay for essential expenses, such as food, housing, healthcare, and childcare. In this special double issue of RSF, sociologists Alexes Harris, Mary Pattillo, and Bryan L. Sykes and an interdisciplinary roster of contributors examine how financial penalties generate a plethora of collateral consequences.

The 17 articles in this double issue are the culmination of five years of research in California, Georgia, Illinois, Minnesota, Missouri, New York, Texas, and Washington. Together they represent the first cross-state study of monetary sanctions. Issue 1 looks at how the system of monetary sanctions operates, while Issue 2 examines the social consequences of such sanctions. Among the compelling findings documented: High rates of incarceration economically damage states, leading some jurisdictions to sue incarcerated individuals for the cost of jail/prison stays to mitigate the fiscal harm. Imposing monetary sanctions extends beyond the penal code and into the civil realm, blur-ring distinctions between civil and criminal law, with broad implications for how observed racial disparities are constructed. People of color, indigenous communities, immigrants—both documented and undocumented—and women are uniquely impacted by the system of monetary sanctions. The racially disparate impact of monetary sanctions intensifies the aggressive policing of Black and Latinx neighborhoods because these racial groups typically find it more difficult to pay. Individuals and families receiving cash and non-cash public assistance are significantly more likely to owe monetary sanctions and are less likely to pay them, prolonging their surveillance by the state. The monitoring and collection of fines, fees, and other costs extends and deepens the punishment of nonpayers and individuals reentering society, and warps the very legal institutions that legislate and implement these practices.

This volume of RSF provides a timely examination of how monetary sanctions permanently bind people who are poor to the judicial system and provides comprehensive documentation of a complex, two-tiered legal system that imposes high costs on already burdened groups.

DOWNLOAD A FREE DIGITAL COPY - Part 1

DOWNLOAD A FREE DIGITAL COPY - Part 2

Nearly 46 million Americans live in rural counties—areas with small populations that are often located far from large cities. Yet we know relatively little about how living in a rural area influences child and adolescent life trajectories and adult outcomes when compared to their urban counterparts. In this special double issue of RSF, sociologist Shelley Clark, epidemiologist Sam Harper, and agricultural economist Bruce Weber, and an interdisciplinary group of contributors look at the impact that growing up rural has across the lifespan, examining both the challenges and advantages of growing up in rural America.

The 15 articles in this double issue explore the effects of rural life on family, educational attainment, economic security, and health. Issue 1 looks at the impact of rural families and schools on children’s and adolescents’ educational aspirations and wellbeing. Jennifer Sherman and Kai A. Schafft find that while rural gentrification brings needed resources to struggling communities, it can also exacerbate educational inequality. Jessica C. Drescher and colleagues reveal that only modest differences in educational outcomes exist between rural and non-rural students. Ryan Parsons shows that rural students with college aspirations, particularly students of color, incur social and emotional costs in pursuing upward mobility not experienced by their urban counterparts, such as having to permanently relocate to more advantaged areas.

Issue 2 examines transitions to adulthood and the longer-term influences of growing up in rural areas on adults’ health and economic attainment. Emily Miller and Kathryn Edin find that low-income rural young adults have children and marry earlier than their peers, but achieve other markers of adulthood, such as leaving the parental home, more slowly and often only tentatively. Robert D. Francis shows that rural, working-class men employ various strategies to improve their employment opportunities that support their existing identities, such as obtaining credentials to be truck drivers or mechanics. For example, they pursue additional education and training in fields that will allow them to continue to hold traditionally masculine, working-class jobs, such as obtaining credentials to be truck drivers or mechanics. Evan Roberts and colleagues find that growing up on or moving to a farm were associated with better health outcomes. Emily Parker and colleagues find that rural residents who live in counties that receive a higher amount of federal funding and moved from their home county in adulthood were more likely to achieve higher educational attainment and earnings than those in counties that received less funding.

This issue of RSF provides a more nuanced understanding of the advantages and disadvantages of growing up in rural areas and how it shapes the life trajectories of rural Americans.

DOWNLOAD A FREE DIGITAL COPY

The twenty-first century has seen dramatic shifts in the nature of work, including a decrease in economic security and job opportunities for low-skilled workers. At the same time, the nature of families has also changed significantly, including a delay and decrease in marriage and the development of new types of complex family structures. These changes in work and family have contributed to a rise in inequality, with many lower-income families experiencing poverty and economic hardship as a result. Yet, public policy has not adapted to address these issues. In this issue of RSF, sociologists Marcia J. Carlson, and Christopher Wimer, developmental psychologist Ron Haskins, and an interdisciplinary group of contributors examine the growing needs of low-income families and explore both the extent to which public policy effectively serves them and how it can be improved.

The nine articles in this issue examine various aspects of contemporary work and family life for low-income families, the challenges they face, and whether current policies help to mitigate these challenges. Sigrid Luhr and colleagues find that unpredictable work schedules were associated with increased difficulty arranging childcare, work-life conflict, and missed work for working mothers. Elizabeth O. Ananat and colleagues show that Emeryville, California’s Fair Workweek Ordinance decreased working parents’ schedule unpredictability, and improved their well-being without reducing worker hours. Pamela Joshi and colleagues find that less than a quarter of low-income, full-time working families earn enough to cover a basic family budget, compared to two-thirds of all full-time working families. Katherine M. Michelmore and Natasha V. Pilkauskas reveal that nearly 60% of children in lower-income families reside in households with a complex family structure that may result in difficulty filing for important tax credits like the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) that can help increase their incomes. Jennifer Randles shows that income and public aid are insufficient for many mothers to cover the cost of one of children’s basic needs, diapers, and suggests policies to help bridge this gap in the face of widespread economic insecurity.

This issue of RSF illuminates the many obstacles faced by lower-income families due to changes in the labor market and family pat-terns as well as the ways in which public policy can better respond to alleviate these obstacles.

DOWNLOAD A FREE DIGITAL COPY - Part 1

DOWNLOAD A FREE DIGITAL COPY - Part 2

Status—a form of inequality based on esteem, respect, and honor—affects how people are treated in all aspects of their lives, including in schools, workplaces, politics, and even the family. It shapes people’s access to valued outcomes in life, such as income, education, and health. However, status is poorly understood and its significance in the construction of inequality is often underestimated. In this special double issue of RSF, sociologist Cecilia L. Ridgeway, social psychologist Hazel Rose Markus, and an interdisciplinary group of contributors examine how status functions in society and its role in inequality.

Issue 1 demonstrates that status is fundamental to inequality and shows that it is different from other forms of inequality. Tali Mendelberg presents a theory of how status functions in politics and differentiates the potent symbolic value of achieving greater esteem from status-seeking as a means to obtain resources, such as income, assets, or property. Biko Koeing finds that Trump voters were motivated not only by a perceived loss of status, but by the belief that this loss was unjust. Fabien Accominotti and colleagues assess the characteristics of status hierarchies and find that those with greater clarity, rigidity, and order have greater inequality between high and low status members.

Issue 2 examines how status is created and reinforced through cultural norms and in our relationships with one another. Hilary Holbrow finds that the gender pay gap is nearly three times greater in companies where low-status support roles are held primarily by females. Natasha Quadlin finds that college graduates who are perceived to be wealthy are also perceived to be more intelligent than they would be if they were perceived to be members of a lower socioeconomic group. Annette Lareau finds that married women often behave in ways—such as disengagement from financial matters or downplaying their own financial knowledge—that sustain their husband’s status as economic expert of the family. Bianca Manago and colleagues find that prior contact and group interaction between White, Black, and Mexican Americans decreases White anxiety about working with Black and Mexican Americans, but does not increase Whites’ perceptions of Blacks’ and Mexican Americans’ competence. Status interventions during interaction, however, do increase Whites’ perceptions of Mexican Americans’ competence and their influence in the group. Lehn Benjamin finds that staff at nonprofit organizations who share control and establish common ground with their clients reduce status hierarchies between staff and clients.

This issue of RSF sheds light on status as a powerful social force which pervades our lives, and demonstrates its role in creating and preserving inequality.