Abstract
In this article, we analyze the role of local jurisdictions in regulating United States immigration, focusing on local policy responses to unauthorized migration in Montgomery County, Maryland. Important theoretical questions involve the conditions under which local policy responses, and their bureaucratic implementation, are inclusive or exclusive. Our findings indicate that perceptions of public safety are decisive. Consistent with other research on bureaucratic incorporation, our analysis indicates that bureaucratic practice can precede formal policy-making. Yet, this dynamic is not inherently inclusive, and can instead lead to exclusionary measures in order to protect against perceived threats to public safety.
Acknowledgments
The authors are grateful to the Transatlantic Academy in Washington DC for making the research underlying this article possible. They also like to thank the anonymous referees for Urban Geography, whose comments were invaluable for the revision and finalization of the article.
Notes
1. Cf. the various Montgomery County Council Grant overviews from Fiscal year 2009 onward at http://www6.montgomerycountymd.gov/csltmpl.asp?url=/content/Council/Council_Grants_index.asp accessed 16 October 2012.
2. The lower house of Maryland’s bicameral state legislature.
3. Taken from http://www.casademaryland.org/programs-mainmenu-73/services-mainmenu-76?task=view accessed 15 October 2012.
4. These are the tuition fees for the academic year 2011–2012. http://cms.montgomerycollege.edu/edu/department2.aspx?id=20,126 accessed 22 October 2012.
5. The 2009 Montgomery County new criminal justice policy is applicable to violent offenses in sections 4-203 and 14-101 of the Maryland Criminal Law Code of 2008. Section 4-203 refers to among others (an attempt to) sexual offenses, robbery, assaults, arson and murder. Added as a consequence of the bus shooting in Silver Spring is section 14-101, which includes wearing, carrying or transporting a handgun.