When For Better Is For Worse: Immigration Law’s Gendered Impact on Foreign Polygamous Marriage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The United States has banned polygamous immigrants since the late nineteenth century. Enacted amid isolationist fears that an influx of polygamists would cause moral deterioration, the polygamy bar remains a resolute, if often overlooked, feature of modern immigration law. The current immigration scheme continues this tradition, rendering immigrants who intend to practice polygamy in the United States categorically ineligible for legal-permanent-resident status. As a result, the immigration bar allows polygamous men to immigrate with a wife of their choosing and the children from each of their marriages. Their other wives, however, are deemed inadmissible to the United States. This Note explores the immigration bar’s disproportionate effect on the foreign wives of polygamous immigrants. In addition to precluding the other wives of polygamous immigrants from legal permanent-resident status, the current immigration bar also renders such women ineligible for humanitarian ingress. After offering a comparative analysis of how Canada and the United Kingdom reconcile their respective policies against polygamy with the burgeoning question of women’s rights, this Note proposes that Congress likewise treat foreign women in polygamous unions with a degree of equity.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".