Skip to main content


Immigrants and civil rights in cross-national perspective: Lessons from North America

  • 536 Accesses

  • 7 Citations


The degree to which a nation envisions civil rights as applying to all residents offers insight into its commitment to and capacity for immigrant inclusion. A much-debated question is whether there is a trend toward convergence in national policies around immigrant inclusion, given globalization and the rise in human rights norms. Or do institutional legacies and domestic politics tend to preserve old approaches? This issue has been investigated most thoroughly in European contexts. Here we examine the cases of Canada and the United States. We find that while Canada and the United States, both settler societies, have much in common, they differ significantly in their historical experience with civil rights, which helps explain differences in how they approach the inclusion of immigrants in their societies. While civil rights has more potential for advancing immigrant concerns in the United States, neither country readily envisions immigrant inclusion as a civil rights issue.


  1. Bloemraad, Irene. 2011. ““Two Peas in a Pod,” “Apples and Oranges,” and other Food Metaphors: Comparing Canada and the United States. American Behavioral Scientist 55(9): 1131–1159.

  2. Bloemraad, Irene and Els de Graauw. 2012. “Immigrant Integration and Policy in the United States: A Loosely Stitched Patchwork.” Pp. 205–231 in International Perspectives: Integration and Inclusion, edited by James Frideres and John Biles. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press.

  3. Brubaker, William Rogers. 1992. Citizenship and Nationhood in France and Germany. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

  4. Cairns, Alan C. 1995. Reconfigurations: Canadian Citizenship and Constitutional Change, Selected Essays. Toronto, ON: McClelland & Stewart.

  5. Calavita, Kitty. 1992. Inside the State: The Bracero Program, Immigration, and the I.N.S. NY: Routledge.

  6. Cornelius, Wayne A. 2005. “Controlling ‘unwanted’ immigration: Lessons from the United States, 1993–2004.” Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 31(4): 775–794.

  7. Cornelius, Wayne A., Philip L. Martin and James F. Hollifield, (eds.) 1994. Controlling immigration: A global perspective. Stanford University Press.

  8. Decker, Scott, Paul Lewis, Doris Marie Provine, and Monica Varsanyi. 2009. “On the Frontier of Local Law Enforcement: Local Police and Federal Immigration Law,” in William McDonald (ed.) Immigration, Crime, and Justice. NY: Emerald: 261–277.

  9. García, Juan Ramon. 1980. Operation Wetback: The Mass Deportation of Mexican Undocumented Workers in 1954. Westport CT: Greenwood.

  10. Geddes, Andrew. 2003. The Politics of Migration and Immigration in Europe. London: Sage.

  11. German Marshall Fund of the United States. 2009. Transatlantic Trends: Immigration, 2009. Washington, DC: German Marshall Fund. At (accessed 16 February 2012).

  12. Goodman, Sara Wallace. 2010. “Integration Requirements for Integration’s Sake? Identifying, Categorizing and Comparing Civic Integration Policies,” Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 36(5): 753–772.

  13. Hamlin, Rebecca. 2012. “International Law and Administrative Insulation: A Comparison of Refugee Status Determination Regimes in the United States, Canada, and Australia.” Law & Social Inquiry 37(4): 933–968.

  14. Hawkins, Freda. 1988 [1972]. Canada and Immigration: Public Policy and Public Concern. Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University Press.

  15. Hoefer, Michael, Nancy Rytina, and Bryan C. Baker. 2011. “Estimates of the Unauthorized Immigrant Population Residing in the United States: January 2010.” Office of Immigration Statistics, Department of Homeland Security.

  16. Howard, M.M. 2009. The Politics of Citizenship in Europe. New York: Cambridge University Press.

  17. Ignatieff, Michael. 2007. The Rights Revolution. House of Anansi Press.

  18. Joppke, Christian. 2001. “The Legal-Domestic Sources of Immigrant Rights.” Comparative Political Studies 34(4): 339–66.

  19. Joppke, Christian. 2007. Transformation of Immigrant Integration: Civic Integration and Antidiscrimination in the Netherlands, France, and Germany. World Politics 59(2): 243–273.

  20. Kelley, Ninette, and M. J. Trebilcock. 2010. The Making of the Mosaic: A history of Canadian immigration policy, 2nd ed. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

  21. Kluger, Richard. 2005 [1974]. Simple Justice: The History of Brown v. Board of Education and Black America’s Struggle for Equality. NY: Vintage Books.

  22. Knopff, Rainer and F.L. Morton. 1992. Charter Politics. Toronto: Nelson Canada.

  23. Koopmans, R., Michalowski, I. and Waibel, S. 2012 “Citizenship Rights for Immigrants: National Political Processes and Cross-National Convergence in Western Europe, 1980–2008.” American Journal of Sociology 117(4): 1202–1245.

  24. Labelle, Micheline, François Rocher and Guy Rocher. 1995. “Pluriethnicité, citoyenneté et intégration: de la souveraineté pour lever les obstacles et les ambiguïtés.” Cahiers de recherche sociologique 25: 213–245.

  25. Messina, Anthony A. 2007. The Logics and Politics of Post-WWII Migration to Western Europe. Cambridge University Press.

  26. Migrant Integration Policy Index. 2010. “Anti-Discrimination Policy.” Available at Last accessed January 8, 2013.

  27. Morton, F.L., Peter H. Russell and Michael Withey. 1992. “The Supreme Court’s first one hundred Charter of Rights decisions: a statistical analysis.” Osgoode Hall Law Journal 30(1): 1–56.

  28. Provine, Doris M., Monica Varsanyi, Paul G. Lewis and Scott H. Decker. 2012. “Growing Tensions between Civic Membership and Enforcement in the Devolution of Immigration Control.” In Punishing Immigrants: Policy, Politics, and Injustice, Kubrin, Zatz and Martinez (eds.), NY: NYU Press.

  29. Reimers, David M. and Harold Troper. 1992. “Canadian and American Immigration Policy since 1945.” In Immigration, Language, and Ethnicity: Canada and the United States, edited by Barry R. Chiswick. Washington D.C.: The AEI Press.

  30. Roy, Patricia E. 1989. A White Man’s Province: British Columbia politicians and Chinese and Japanese immigrants, 1858–1914. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.

  31. Smith, Roger M. 1997. Civic Ideals: Conflicting visions of citizenship in U.S. History. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

  32. Somers, Margaret R., and Christopher N.J. Roberts. 2008. “Toward a new sociology of rights: a genealogy of “buried bodies” of citizenship and human rights.” Annual Review of Law and Social Science 4: 385–425.

  33. Soysal, Yasemin N. 1994. Limits of Citizenship: Migrants and Postnational Membership in Europe. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

  34. Tichenor, Daniel. 2002. Dividing Lines: The Politics of Immigration Control in America. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

  35. Triadafilopoulos, Triadafilos. 2012. Becoming Multicultural: Immigration and the Politics of Citizenship in Canada and Germany. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.

  36. Vink, Maarten P. and Gerard-Rene de Groot. 2010. “Citizenship Attribution in Western Europe: International Framework and Domestic Trends.” Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 36(5): 713–34.

  37. Wolgin, Philip E. and Irene Bloemraad. 2010. “Our Gratitude to Our Soldiers”: Military Spouses, Family Re-unification, and Postwar Immigration Reform. Journal of Interdisciplinary History 41(1): 27–60.

  38. Yoo, Grace J. 2008. “Immigrants and Welfare: Policy Constructions of Deservingness. Journal of Immigrant and Refugee Studies 6(4): 490–507.

  39. Zolberg, Aristide R. 2006. A Nation by Design: Immigration Policy in the Fashioning of America. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Download references

Author information

Correspondence to Irene Bloemraad.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bloemraad, I., Provine, D.M. Immigrants and civil rights in cross-national perspective: Lessons from North America. CMS 1, 45–68 (2013).

Download citation


  • immigrant inclusion
  • civil-rights regimes
  • language of rights
  • convergence hypothesis
  • institutional legacies