Public perceptions and media coverage are powerful forces in shaping the immigration debate. Understanding public opinion on immigration, how it impacts the political debate, and how it affects reform prospects is critical when designing a strategy to advance thoughtful, rational, and effective immigration and integration policy. This volume analyzes how the public perceives immigration and immigrants--from their effects on the job market to their impact on culture and society to their prospects for integration. The authors assess the forces that shape how we perceive immigration and immigrants. The book also highlights patterns and trends in how political leaders speak about immigration. Focusing on three case studies, the United States, the United Kingdom, and Germany, the volume includes chapters analyzing public opinion and media coverage of immigration issues in each country. Additional chapters propose strategies for unblocking opposition to thoughtful, effective immigration-related reforms. In collaboration with the Migration Policy Institute

Although ambivalence characterizes the stance of scholars toward the desirability of close opinion-policy linkages in general, it is especially evident with regard to immigration. The controversy and disagreement about whether public opinion should drive immigration policy are among the factors making immigration one of the most difficult political debates across the West. Leading international experts and aspiring researchers from the fields of political science and sociology use a range of case studies from North America, Europe and Australia to guide the reader through the complexities of this debate offering an unprecedented comparative examination of public opinion and immigration. part one discusses the socio-economic and contextual determinants of immigration attitudes across multiple nations part two explores how the economy can affect public opinion part three presents different perspectives on the issue of causality – do attitudes about immigration drive politics, or do politics drive attitudes? part four investigates how several types of framing are critical to understanding public opinion and how a wide range of political factors can mould public opinion, and often in ways that work against immigration and immigrants part five examines the views of the largest immigrant group in the U.S. – Latinos – as well as how opinions are shaped by contact with and opinions about immigrants in the U.S. and Canada. An essential read to all who wish to understand the nature of immigration research from a theoretical as well as practical point of view.

The United States is once again experiencing a major influx of immigrants. Questions about who should be admitted and what benefits should be afforded to new members of the polity are among the most divisive and controversial contemporary political issues. Using an impressive array of evidence from national surveys, The Politics of Belonging illuminates patterns of public opinion on immigration and explains why Americans hold the attitudes they do. Rather than simply characterizing Americans as either nativist or nonnativist, this book argues that controversies over immigration policy are best understood as questions over political membership and belonging to the nation. The relationship between citizenship, race, and immigration drive the politics of belonging in the United States and represents a dynamism central to understanding patterns of contemporary public opinion on immigration policy. Beginning with a historical analysis, this book documents why this is the case by tracing the development of immigration and naturalization law, institutional practices, and the formation of the American racial hierarchy. Then, through a comparative analysis of public opinion among white, black, Latino, and Asian Americans, it identifies and tests the critical moderating role of racial categorization and group identity on variation in public opinion on immigration.

In the past few years, liberal and mainstream outlets have tended to frame immigrants lacking legal status as "undocumented" (rather than "illegal") and to approach the topic of legalization through human-interest stories, often mentioning children. Conservative outlets, on the other hand, tend to discuss legalization using impersonal statistics and invoking the rule of law. Yet, regardless of the media's ideological positions, the authors' surveys show that "negative" frames more strongly influence public support for different immigration policies than do positive frames. For instance, survey participants who were exposed to language portraying immigrants as law-breakers seeking "amnesty" tended to oppose legalization measures. At the same time, support for legalization was higher when participants were exposed to language referring to immigrants living in the United States for a decade or more.

Ballot box voting is often considered the essence of political freedom. But it has two major shortcomings: individual voters have little chance of making a difference, and they face strong incentives to remain ignorant about the issues at stake. "Voting with your feet," however, avoids both these pitfalls and offers a wider range of choices. In Free to Move, Ilya Somin explains how broadening opportunities for foot voting can greatly enhance political liberty for millions of people around the world. People can vote with their feet through international migration, choosing where to live within a federal system, and by making decisions in the private sector. Somin addresses a variety of common objections to expanded migration rights, including claims that the "self-determination" of natives requires giving them the power to exclude migrants, and arguments that migration is likely to have harmful side effects, such as undermining political institutions, overburdening the welfare state, increasing crime and terrorism, and spreading undesirable cultural values. While these objections are usually directed at international migration, Somin shows how a consistent commitment to such theories would also justify severe restrictions on domestic freedom of movement. By making a systematic case for a more open world, Free to Move challenges conventional wisdom on both the left and the right. This revised and expanded edition addresses key new issues, including fears that migration could spread dangerous diseases, such as Covid-19, claims that immigrants might generate a political backlash that threatens democracy, and the impact of remote work.

This comparative volume provides a comprehensive cross-national account of media coverage and public attitudes toward migration both within and into the European Union. Using empirical research from across Germany, Hunary, Poland, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom, Media and Public Attitudes Toward Migration in Europe offers an in-depth exploration of one of the most prominent social and political topics of the decade in Europe. Drawing on a large scale, cross-national panel survey, experiments, and media content analysis of migration discourse in both traditional news media and social media, expert contributors from across the continent investigate topics such as the linguistic features of migration coverage, the public perception of migrants, and the effects of journalistic communication strategies. Other topics addressed include a discussion of news framing effects on migration coverage and politicians’ postings on social media coverage about the issue. This is a valuable resource for academics, students, and policymakers interested in media coverage of migration, news framing effects, and public attitudes to migration generally. .

Twenty-nine specialists offer their perspectives on migration from a wide variety of fields: political science, sociology, economics, and anthropology.