Crimmigration—Structural Tools of Settler Colonialism

The systems of immigration and criminal law come together in many important ways, one of which being their role in instilling difference and undermining inclusion and integration. In this article, I will begin a discussion examining the concept of integration, simplistically described as inclusion into “American” life, not in the more traversed realm of citizenship, but in the context of crimmigration. I posit that when considering the relationship between those who are formally considered integrated versus other, or outsider, which may or may not overlap with immigration status, the accepted concept of integration is misguided at best. Instead, if the concept of integration is framed as an epistemological tool of settler colonialism, the construction of race provides a more fruitful line of inquiry. There remains a divide in United States civil society, where people racialized as nonwhite do not have the same lived experience as people racialized as white. Similarly, identity, or the perception of race, play a role in the criminal justice system, wherein people racialized as nonwhite are disproportionately incarcerated. These two problems are mutually reinforcing — being poor increases the chances of being incarcerated, while being a person racialized as nonwhite is part of the equation in socio-economic standing and the likelihood of experiencing incarceration. Achieving socio-economic parity with people racialized as white has generally been considered a hallmark of what over-simplistically, and even dangerously, is characterized as integration. These problems are replicated in and by the crimmigration system. Just as people racialized as nonwhite are more likely to be relatively socio-economically poor and more likely to have contact with the criminal justice system, immigrants racialized as nonwhite face these same challenges. The effects of racialization are significant, and the mechanisms purportedly designed to reverse, erase, or change these dynamics have failed immigrants and citizens racialized as nonwhite. There is a longstanding myth that in a democratic society, such as the United States, everyone has the opportunity, the path, and maybe even a right to strive to and achieve integration. Becoming a naturalized United States citizen is a symbol or marker of such achievement, although it is superficial and still limited with respect to full membership and integration. Citizenship does not elevate one above the caste system of racialized hierarchy. The failure of integration is evidenced by the reality that immigrants and citizens racialized as nonwhite do not obtain the socio-economic successes of the dominant class. This article will propose that the promise of integration is a myth. Even more than a false promise, the concept of integration itself erases the historical racialized institutional infrastructure that is responsible for the falseness of this promise. Crimmigration is a piece of this larger puzzle. Derek Bell’s consideration of racial realism and theories of settler colonialism will be explored here to propose a theory of why the offer of integration is disingenuous and a promise never intended to be fulfilled. Settler colonialism is a continuing form of nation building, whereby settlers fortify the dominant culture, removing and replacing communities with constructed ones. (While racism predates colonialism, it plays a leading role in settler colonialism.) These methodologies also help explain why and how crimmigration is an extension of settler colonialism and is responsible for reinforcing racialized differences and the impossibility (and perhaps undesirability) of integration. While the theoretical tool of integration provides some insight into the relationship between racialization and the roles of the criminal justice and crimmigration systems, broadening the lens to examine crimmigration via the methodologies of racial realism and settler colonialism exposes the flaws in the integrationist paradigm.