MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W245943306

Historical Impact of Race and Ethnicity upon Immigration in the United States: Theoretical Perspectives and the Application to Contemporary Latinos

2008· article· en· W245943306 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueForum on public policy · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Ethnicity, and Economy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmigrationNaturalizationImmigration lawPolitical scienceDeportationConstitutionLawCitizenshipPoliticsHistoryAlien
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

I. Introduction Since humans first appeared on the earth in large numbers, immigration (1) by them from one place to another place has occurred. (2) Biologists confirm that human beings emerged first in Africa and began to migrate from Africa about 60,000 years ago. (3) While Native Americans are referred to as the First Nation people in the United States, Native Americans were reported to have migrated to America from Asia, crossing a land bridge into Alaska and then down into America. (4) Historians have documented the lives and movement of persons during the First Millennium BC (5) and 2200 BC in Mesopotamia and Egypt. (6) As governments of countries grew and developed, they often passed laws and codes restricting entrance into their countries. Subsequent laws, such as the laws within the nascent America, were generally passed while immigration was being encouraged at one point. For instance, America invited immigrants in the 1700s, although it passed An Act to Establish a Uniform Rule of Naturalization in 1790 (7) and the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798. (8) The U. S. Constitution, formulated in 1787, referenced immigration in Article 1, Section 9, (9) and forbade Congress from prohibiting immigration until 1808, (10) indicating that the United States wanted immigration for about 20 years. As a consequence, waves of immigrants from Ireland and Germany came to the United States in the 1800s. (11) The movement of groups of people into a new place often produced conflict, (12) and the intensity of this conflict often was determined by the race and ethnicity of newcomers. (13) For instance, several laws were passed in the 1800s in the United States to control the entrance of persons from China. Revealing differences in how race was viewed, a federal judge in 1882, who was deciding a case involving an Asian, commented on our worthy resident aliens from Europe--gentlemen of Irish and German nativity. (14) This comment seemed to differentiate Asians from persons of Irish and German descent, implying that Asians were unworthy and the Irish and Germans were worthy. Barry W. Higman asserted that in the late 19th century, New Zealand, Canada, the United States, and Australia pursued immigration policies based centrally upon race. (15) The number of Germans, Irish, and Italians in the 1800s created concerns among some Americans, and Congress created the first immigration statute in 1875, barring the admission of convicts and prostitutes. (16) This same 1875 law, however, specifically targeted Chinese, and Congress passed more restrictive legislation, such as the Chinese Exclusion Act, in 1882. (17) The legal literature confirms that the principal targets were Asians, and the federal courts, including the United States Supreme Court, decided a number of cases involving immigration and persons of Asian descent. (18) During this period, there were little or no case laws pertaining to immigration and White Europeans like there were for Asians. However, in the 1920s, cases were decided on who was White and who was not White and their eligibility for naturalization. In the 21st century, immigration continues to be a highly sensitive topic in the United States, and the focus again is upon race and ethnicity. While the focus is primarily upon illegal immigrants as opposed to legal immigrants, the underlying issue is ethnicity. Legal residents are those persons who were granted lawful permanent residence, asylee status, refugees, and granted a temporary stay for work or school, whereas illegal or unauthorized residents are those persons who are foreign born, non citizen who entered the United States without inspection or were temporary admitted but stayed longer than granted by their visas. (19) Today, the illegal residents that cause the most concern are Latinos in the United States. (20) In 1979, John Tanton created an organization called the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), which has its genesis in a race and eugenics ideology and stresses how immigration from Mexico and Latin America is going to destroy the United States. …

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.682
Threshold uncertainty score0.903

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.296 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it