“James Gibson tackles one of the most pressing issues in contemporary American politics: the health and likely trajectory of our constitutional democracy. His extensive and careful analysis of the 2020 presidential contest, and its aftermath, lead him to a startling conclusion. By and large, Americans’ faith in their political institutions held steady. Scholars, and anyone concerned about the future of our democracy, should read this fascinating book.”
—VINCENT HUTCHINGS, Hanes Walton Jr. Collegiate Professor, Political Science Department and Department of Afro American and African Studies (by courtesy), University of Michigan

“James Gibson advances a cogent analysis showing that our national political institutions remain robust despite efforts to undermine them during and after the 2020 election. Loaded with critical empirical findings and normative implications, Democracy’s Destruction? is a book one will want to keep handy as we sort through future contentious elections and risks to democratic norms and institutions.”
—BRANDON BARTELS, professor of political science, George Washington University

On January 6, 2021, an angry mob stormed the U.S. Capitol in an attempt to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. This assault on America’s democratic system was orchestrated by then President Donald Trump, abetted by his political party, and supported by a vocal minority of the American people. Did denial of the election results and the subsequent insurrection inflict damage on American political institutions? While most pundits and many scholars say yes, they have offered little rigorous evidence for this assertion. In Democracy’s Destruction? political scientist James L. Gibson uses surveys from representative samples of the American population to provide a more informed answer to the question.

Focusing on the U.S. Supreme Court, the presidency, and the U.S. Senate, Gibson reveals that how people assessed the election, the insurrection, and even the second Trump impeachment has little connection to their willingness to view American political institutions as legitimate. Instead, legitimacy is grounded in more general commitments to democratic values and support for the rule of law. On most issues of institutional legitimacy, those who denied the election results and supported the insurrection were not more likely to be alienated from political institutions and to consider them illegitimate.

Democracy’s Destruction? offers rigorous analysis of the effect of the Trump insurrection on the state of U.S. democracy today. While cautioning that Trump and many Republicans may be devising schemes to subvert the next presidential election more effectively, the book attests to the remarkable endurance of American political institutions.

JAMES L. GIBSON is Sidney W. Souers Professor of Government at Washington University in St. Louis.

“In Structured Luck, Onoso Imoagene gives us an unparalleled look into the U.S. Diversity Visa Program, revealing its far-reaching effects on the life trajectories of migrants and its role as a catalyst of the migration industry in countries of origin. Through rich interviews and careful institutional analysis in the United States, Nigeria, and Ghana, she offers us a critical assessment of the program’s reputation as a windfall lottery and shows us that luck, in this case, is painstakingly made through strategic responses to policy constraints.”
Natasha Iskander, James Weldon Johnson Professor of Urban Planning and Public Service, New York University

The Diversity Immigrant Visa Program is a lottery that awards winners from underrepresented countries the chance to apply for legal permanent residence in the United States. Most lottery winners think of themselves as lucky, viewing the win as an opportunity to pursue better lives for themselves and their families. In Structured Luck, sociologist Onoso Imoagene uses immigrants’ stories to show how the program’s design often leads to their exploitation in their origin countries, the interruption of their education, and reduced potential once they are in the United States.

Combining ethnographic observation in Africa and interviews with over one hundred immigrants from Ghana and Nigeria, Imoagene demonstrates that the visa program is a process of “structured luck,” from how people hear about the lottery, who registers for it, and who participates in it to the application requirements for the visa. In Ghana and Nigeria, people often learn about the lottery through friends, colleagues, or relatives who persuade them to enter for the perceived benefits of receiving a visa: opportunities for upward mobility, permanent legal status, and the ability to bring along family members. Though anyone can enter the lottery, not everyone who wins obtains a visa. The visa application process requires proof of a high school diploma or artisan skills, a medical exam, a criminal background check, an interview with U.S. consular officers, and payment of fees. Such requirements have led to the growth of visa entrepreneurs, who often charge exorbitant fees to steer immigrants through the process. Visa recipients who were on track to obtain university degrees at home often leave in the middle of their studies for the United States but struggle to continue their education due to high U.S. tuition costs. And though their legal status allows them to escape the demoralizing situations that face the undocumented, these immigrants lack the social support that the government sometimes provides for refugees and other migrants. Ultimately, Imoagene notes, the real winner of the visa lottery is not the immigrants themselves but the United States, which benefits from their relatively higher levels of education. Consequently, she argues, the U.S. must do more to minimize the visa program’s negative consequences.

Structured Luck illuminates the trauma, resilience, and determination of immigrants who come to the United States through the Diversity Visa Program and calls for the United States to develop policies that will better integrate them into society.

ONOSO IMOAGENE is associate professor of social research and public policy at New York University, Abu Dhabi.

"When Care Is Conditional brings together trenchant analysis and deeply moving humanity to understand the barriers faced by Latinx immigrants and their strategies for well-being as they negotiate conditional care in the United States. Through nuanced research and the voices of ordinary people, Dani Carrillo shows how immigration policy, residential location, and, especially, gender shape who can get help, how much, and under what conditions. Beautifully written, this book is a must-read for scholars, policymakers, and philanthropists dedicated to advancing everyone’s well-being."
—IRENE BLOEMRAAD, Class of 1951 Professor of Sociology, University of California, Berkeley

"When Care Is Conditional is a critical reassessment of the failure of social protection in the United States through the lens of low-wage immigrants. Dani Carrillo offers a bottom-up examination of the patchwork of safety net institutions and the perennial difficulty of accessing them. In doing so, she disrupts the idyllic view of the suburbs and reveals how immigrant networks and civil society try to help fill in the gap. More than just a structural accounting, this book centers the importance of cultural narratives and stigmas in reinforcing 'conditional care' and in doing so helps us understand the dynamics of exclusion for all vulnerable racialized communities."
—SHANNON GLEESON, Edmund Ezra Day Professor and chair, Department of Labor Relations, Law, and History, Cornell University

"Dani Carrillo deftly weaves policy history with personal narratives of Latinx immigrants to lay bare how restrictive immigration policies undermine the well-being of families that too often are living in the shadows of our communities and society. The book comes at a critical time in our national, state, and local dialogue around immigration and social policy. When Care Is Conditional is critical reading for scholars, policymakers, and practitioners alike."
—SCOTT W. ALLARD, Associate Dean for Research and Engagement and Daniel J. Evans Endowed Professor of Social Policy, Evans School of Public Policy and Governance, University of Washington

From its inception, the public safety net in the United States has excluded many people because of their race, gendered roles, or other factors. As a result, they must prove their moral worthiness to get resources for themselves and their families. In When Care Is Conditional, sociologist Dani Carrillo reveals the ramifications of this conditional safety net by focusing on one particularly vulnerable population: undocumented immigrants.

Through in-depth interviews with Latinx immigrants in northern California, Carrillo examines three circumstances—place, gender, and immigration status—that intersect to influence an individual’s access to health care, food assistance, and other benefits. She demonstrates that place of residence affects undocumented immigrants’ ability to get care since more services are available in urban areas, where many immigrants cannot afford to live, than suburban areas, where public transportation is limited. She also shows that while both men and women who are undocumented have difficulty obtaining care, men often confront more challenges. Undocumented women who are pregnant or mothers are eligible for some government safety net programs and rely on informal coethnic networks or a “guiding figure”—a relative, friend, neighbor, or coworker—who explains how to get care and makes them feel confident in accessing it. Most undocumented men, in contrast, are not eligible for public programs except in a medical emergency and often lack someone to guide them directly to care. Men sometimes steer one another to jobs through worker centers—where they may learn about various services and take advantage of those that increase their employability, like English or computer classes—but a culture of masculinity leads them to downplay medical problems and seek health care only in a crisis.  

As undocumented immigrants navigate this exclusionary system, Carrillo finds that they resist the rhetoric stigmatizing them as lawbreakers. Dismissing the importance of “papers” and highlighting their work ethic, they question the fairness of U.S. immigration policies and challenge ideas about who deserves care.

Carrillo offers concrete recommendations, such as improving labor conditions and reexamining benefit eligibility, to increase access to care for not only undocumented immigrants but also people who have been excluded because of their race, criminal record, gender identity, sexual orientation, or disability. She argues that working with and across populations creates a powerful form of solidarity in advocating for inclusive care.

When Care Is Conditional provides compelling insights into how safety net and immigration policies intersect to affect people’s everyday lives and calls for a cultural shift so that the United States can provide unconditional care for all.

DANI CARRILLO is a senior researcher and civic technologist.

"Daniel Galvin offers readers a superbly incisive, empirically eclectic, narratively compelling analysis of the contemporary politics of workers’ rights. Alt-Labor and the New Politics of Workers’ Rights perceptively charts and contextualizes striking shifts in the American political economy that have profoundly altered the experiences of low-wage workers. What’s more is that Galvin brilliantly centers the agency and power of marginalized workers and the organizations that advance their interests in the face of significant and ongoing structural challenges. Scholars of American politics, students, organizers, and anyone who cares about the fate of American workers will find insight and inspiration in Galvin’s skillful description and analyses of the politics of alt-labor."
—JAMILA MICHENER, associate professor of government and public policy and senior associate dean of public engagement, Brooks School of Public Policy, Cornell University

"The relentless decline of U.S. unions in recent decades is both a cause and a consequence of the devolution of the bedrock New Deal–era labor law that institutionalized collective bargaining rights for broad swaths of the nation’s labor force. In this lucid, deeply researched study, Daniel Galvin analyzes the rapid expansion of state and local laws governing minimum wages, paid leave, and other conditions of employment, and exposes the challenges that shift presents for the ‘alt-labor’ groups that are increasingly leading the fight for workers’ rights."
—RUTH MILKMAN, Distinguished Professor of Sociology, School of Labor and Urban Studies and the Graduate Center, City University of New York

"Dan Galvin’s book adds exponentially to the scholarship on worker centers and ‘alt-labor’ and so much more. It masterfully traces the shift from labor law to employment law, the consequential turn toward policy and enforcement at the state and local levels, and the strategic capacity worker centers have had to build to carry it out. It thoughtfully engages the puzzle of how organizations with so little have managed to accomplish so much. Alt-Labor and the New Politics of Workers’ Rights is deeply researched, theoretically rich, full of powerful insight, and beautifully written to boot."
—JANICE FINE, professor, Rutgers School of Management and Labor Relations and Workplace Justice Lab@RU

Over the last half century, two major developments have transformed the nature of workers’ rights and altered the pathways available to low-wage workers to combat their exploitation. First, while national labor law, which regulates unionization and collective bargaining, has grown increasingly ineffective, employment laws establishing minimal workplace standards have proliferated at the state and local levels. Second, as labor unions have declined, a diversity of small, under-resourced nonprofit "alt-labor" groups have emerged in locations across the United States to organize and support marginalized workers. In Alt-Labor and the New Politics of Workers’ Rights, political scientist Daniel J. Galvin draws on rich data and extensive interviews to examine the links between these developments. With nuance and insight, Galvin explains how alt-labor groups are finding creative ways to help their members while navigating the many organizational challenges and structural constraints they face in this new context.

Alt-labor groups have long offered their members services and organizing opportunities to contest their unfair treatment on the job. But many groups have grown frustrated by the limited impact of these traditional strategies and have turned to public policy to scale up their work. They have successfully led campaigns to combat wage theft, raise the minimum wage, improve working conditions, strengthen immigrants’ rights, and more. These successes present something of a puzzle: relative to their larger, wealthier, and better-connected opponents, alt-labor groups are small, poor, and weak. Their members are primarily low-wage immigrant workers and workers of color who are often socially, economically, and politically marginalized. With few exceptions, the groups lack large dues-paying memberships and are dependent on philanthropic foundations and other unpredictable sources of funding. How, given their myriad challenges, have alt-labor groups managed to make gains for their members?

Galvin reveals that alt-labor groups are leveraging their deep roots in local communities, their unique position in the labor movement, and the flexibility of their organizational forms to build their collective power and extend their reach. A growing number of groups have also become more politically engaged and have set out to alter their political environments by cultivating more engaged citizens, influencing candidate selection processes, and expanding government capacities. These efforts seek to enhance alt-labor groups’ probabilities of success in the near term while incrementally shifting the balance of power over the long term.

Alt-Labor and the New Politics of Workers’ Rights comprehensively details alt-labor’s turn to policy and politics, provides compelling insights into the dilemmas the groups now face, and illuminates how their efforts have both invigorated and complicated the American labor movement.

DANIEL J. GALVIN is professor of political science at Northwestern University and faculty fellow at the Institute for Policy Research.

"Patchwork Apartheid is a landmark study of racial capitalism and social inequality in the United States. By putting newly available data into dialogue with detailed local histories, Colin Gordon takes readers beyond the storylines and summary facts that typically guide discussions of residential segregation in America. More than any other work I know, this book brings residential segregation into focus as a social, economic, and political process in motion—and as a process in which private actors and market agreements played preeminent roles in constructing the nation’s racial and spatial boundaries. Beautifully written and powerfully argued, Patchwork Apartheid should appeal to public and academic audiences alike. It is essential reading for anyone who wants to understand the origins, operations, and consequences of residential segregation in America."
—JOE SOSS, Cowles Chair for the Study of Public Service, University of Minnesota

"Colin Gordon is a singular historian, and this is a singular book. Patchwork Apartheid itemizes the schemes and evasions by which white homeowners continued to insist on their right to assert and convey their right to all-white neighborhoods (and an all-white sector of the housing market) long after the United States Supreme Court had ruled those rights to be legally unenforceable. Gordon is a master of summoning historical particulars into a dramatic refiguration of our understanding of the time and space of American history."
—WALTER JOHNSON, Winthrop Professor of History and professor of African and African American Studies, Harvard University

"Patchwork Apartheid is a remarkable contribution to the rapidly evolving scholarship on the origins of segregation in America. Gordon marshals an unprecedented amount of data to document how private restrictions established racial barriers dividing neighborhoods, suburban subdivisions, and society as a whole. These individual agreements made in the first half of the twentieth century could not be more relevant today, as we collectively grapple with the legacy of our explicitly segregationist past."
—JACOB FABER, associate professor of sociology and public service, Robert F. Wagner School of Public Service, New York University

"Colin Gordon’s prodigious research results in a groundbreaking comparative study of the history, structure, and lasting impact of racially restrictive covenants in an important swath of Midwestern cities. In describing the experience of these central locations, Patchwork Apartheid illustrates important reasons for our national patterns of metropolitan-wide residential segregation."
—CAROL M. ROSE, Gordon Bradford Tweedy Professor Emeritus of Law and Organization and professorial lecturer in law, Yale Law School

For the first half of the twentieth century, private agreements to impose racial restrictions on who could occupy property decisively shaped the development of American cities and the distribution of people within them. Racial restrictions on the right to buy, sell, or occupy property also effectively truncated the political, social, and economic citizenship of those targeted for exclusion. In Patchwork Apartheid, historian Colin Gordon examines the history of such restrictions and how their consequences reverberate today. Drawing on a unique record of property restrictions excavated from local property records in five Midwestern counties, Gordon documents the prevalence of private property restriction in the era before zoning and building codes were widely employed and before federal redlining sanctioned the segregation of American cities and suburbs. This record of private restriction—documented and mapped to the parcel level in Greater Minneapolis, Greater St. Louis, and two Iowa counties—reveals the racial segregation process both on the ground, in the strategic deployment of restrictions throughout transitional central city neighborhoods and suburbs, and in the broader social and legal construction of racial categories and racial boundaries.

Gordon also explores the role of other policies and practices in sustaining segregation. Enforcement of private racial restrictions was held unconstitutional in 1948, and such agreements were prohibited outright in 1968. But their premises and assumptions, and the segregation they had accomplished, were carried forward by an array of private and public policies. Explicit racial restrictions were accompanied and sustained  by the discriminatory  business practices of real estate agents and developers, who characterized certain neighborhoods as white and desirable and others as black and undesirable, thereby hiding segregation behind the promotion of sound property investments, safe neighborhoods, and good schools. These practices were accompanied and sustained by local zoning, which systematically protected white neighborhoods while targeting “blighted” black neighborhoods for commercial and industrial redevelopment, and by a tangle of federal policies that reliably deferred to local and private interests with deep investments in local segregation. Private race restriction was thus a key element in the original segregation of American cities and a source of durable inequalities in housing wealth, housing opportunity, and economic mobility.

Patchwork Apartheid exhaustively documents the history of private restriction in urban settings and demonstrates its crucial role in the ideas and assumptions that have sustained racial segregation in the United States into the twenty-first century.

COLIN GORDON is a professor of history at the University of Iowa

***

Interactive maps, datasets, and codebooks

The datasets linked below show the spatial location of racial restrictions on property in the City of St. Louis and St. Louis County in Missouri, and in Black Hawk and Johnson Counties in Iowa. Each zipped file contains a Geographic Information System (GIS) shapefile, and a codebook (describing the shapefile attributes) in CSV format. The data for Hennepin County, Minnesota was collected by the Mapping Prejudice project.