Search
Program Calendar
Browse By Day
Browse By Time
Browse By Person
Browse By Session Type
Personal Schedule
Sign In
Deadlines
Policies
Updating Your Submission
Accessible Presentation
FAQs
X (Twitter)
Search Tips
About Annual Meeting
Over the past decade, cities have passed an unprecedented number of laws seeking to drive undocumented immigrants from their jurisdictions. At the same time, however, large numbers of cities have passed policies seeking to incorporate recent immigrants into local civic and social life, regardless of immigration status. What explains why similar cities have responded so differently? Case studies in two sets of paired cities that passed diverging ordinances examine the social and political processes on the ground. Network analysis of the connections between local civil society organizations in each of the four cities identifies the architecture of local civil society networks as a significant factor correlated with the divergent responses to demographic change. The networks in exclusionary cities score highly on measures of density, clustering, and closure, suggest that the network is broken into cliques and that local elites are isolated both from recent immigrants and from non-elite, native-born residents. The high levels of network closure facilitate the creation of rigid group boundaries, the high levels of clustering reinforce pre-existing beliefs within those groups, and the network density aids in the enforcement of sanctions against those who deviate from group norms. By contrast, the networks in inclusionary cities are characterized by multiple organizational bridges between immigrant and native-born communities that facilitate the creation of relationships necessary to craft inclusive policies and a sense that local resources can grow with the population.