“Are They Here Legally?” Institutional Intersectionality in Migrant Advocacy Coalition Work

Abstract

Based on participant observation and semi-structured interviews with resettlement agencies, volunteer organizations, and refugees, this study examined the rhetorical tactics of outreach and advocacy as well as the dynamics of inter-organizational collaboration. Organizations supporting international migrants have different institutional priorities which face pressures by multiple socializing institutions. These operate intersectionally, such that the status of migrants and rhetorical support for them are circumscribed by a recursive relationship between government policies and linguistic labels. The article addresses an important contemporary social problem and articulates an expansion of intersectionality theory within the communication discipline, as well as its implications for coalition work.

Keywords:

• Advocacy
• Coalitions
• Intersectionality
• Migrants
• Socializing Institutions

Disclosure Statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1. Although these categories are both complex and hotly contested, “immigrants” are generally viewed as voluntary migrants, whereas “refugees” are recognized as fleeing some type of imminent danger or persecution. They can only be afforded refugee status from outside the U.S., while “asylees” are those who apply for asylum once already in the country.

2. While postcolonial scholars such as Puar (2017) have critiqued the Orientalist framing of non-Western societies as archaic cultures from which women and queers need to be saved, it is also the case that “queers and migrants have been attacked through shared logics of scapegoating, threat, and deviance” (Chávez, 2013: p. 10).

3. My initial involvement with some of these organizations was driven by a desire to demonstrate solidarity with migrants as well as an interest in learning. As a non-religious Anglo-American, I was fluent neither in the languages of most of the migrants nor in the religious language of some of the organizations. My understanding (and credibility), though, were bolstered by my scholarship in intercultural communication, my experience in international development, and my local ties with various social justice advocacy organizations. My network gradually snowballed over the course of data collection. Overall, I found people very welcoming to me as both an advocate and researcher, with one exception: Only one organization (with which I had prior social ties) was willing to refer me to clients as interviewees; all of the other migrants I interviewed were organizational volunteers or staff members.