2

Here is the prompt:

Prompt: In Impossible Subjects, historian Mae Ngai provides a sociolegal history of illegal immigration to the United States in the twentieth century. Law and policy are the centers of her book, and she examines them at three levels: “in the legislative and political discourses of restriction; in judicial decisions that sought to square competing demands of sovereignty and individual rights; and in the practical articulation of the law, the everyday meanings and consequences of law that are provided by the bureaucratic state’s interactions with migrants and with other social actors (p. 12).”

By using Impossible Subjects, examine how these three levels of law and policy shaped the issues of illegal immigration in twentieth-century America.

You are strictly prohibited from using any other external sources. Violators will be penalized. You can use factual information provided by the lectures, but I would discourage you from relying on them. The point of the assignment is that you should fill the paper with your analysis of information and arguments provided in the Ngai’s book.

Here is my introduction:

The notion of illegal aliens emerged in America under the Immigration Act of 1924. Previously, immigrants who were in America unofficially were given no title, and therefore were indistinguishable from the immigrants who had gone through the processes necessary for citizenship.The advent of this new class of people, illegal immigrants, ushered in a new subject for political and social discourse and judicial decisions, and created and empowered government entities to enforce any new legislation. In twentieth-century America, the political legislation and discourse legitimized racist ideas about illegal immigrants, the judicial decisions reinforced the perceived validity of these racist ideas, and ground level enforcement and social debate dispersed these ideas among the population.

-I know "racist ideas" may not be specific enough so if anyone has any advice regarding that specifically that would be awesome.

closed as off-topic by Pieter Geerkens, EvanM, Mark C. Wallace, John Dallman, ihtkwot Apr 30 '17 at 18:37

This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:

  • "Questions on social sciences other than History are off-topic here, unless they also involve history in some fashion. While ethics, archaeology, etc. are all connected to history, each field has their own experts who are better equipped to answer such questions." – Pieter Geerkens, EvanM, Mark C. Wallace, John Dallman
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • 2
    You'll need to look at Ngai's book to see what she says about those three levels. If there are specific words in that quote from p. 12 you don't understand, look them up first. – Brian Z Apr 29 '17 at 23:32
  • 1
    I feel like while it's historical policy, this belongs more in politics SE. – EvanM Apr 30 '17 at 1:28
  • 1
    It would be difficult for anyone here to assist, since the entirety of your paper must be based on the one cited work. – justCal Apr 30 '17 at 1:45
  • The specific forms of "racist ideas" that Ngai discusses are eugenics and nativism. – Brian Z Apr 30 '17 at 16:00
  • I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it's a homework question. – ihtkwot Apr 30 '17 at 18:37