Results by title

The typical image of a Dreamer is an undocumented Latinx youth—brought to the U.S. through no choice of their own—who excels academically and aspires to contribute to the U.S. economy. This image has engendered political good will and helped push through an executive order that created Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, but it is limited. It fails to account for the full spectrum of diversity among undocumented youth. It also leaves the Dreamer figure stuck in a stage of youth and innocence waiting for immigration reform to allow them to finally transition to adulthood. There is little room in the Dreamer narrative for navigating complex family obligations, employment, entering adult relationships, or other markers of adulthood. In Beyond Dreamers, sociologists Sofya Aptekar and Amy Hsin examine how undocumented young adults navigate the transition to adulthood.

Drawing on more than one hundred interviews with a racially and ethnically diverse group of undocumented college students in New York City, with and without DACA authorization, Aptekar and Hsin show that there is no single undocumented experience. They find that while legal status matters enormously, its impacts are influenced by race, national origin, gender, class, sexuality, family resources, educational institutions, neighborhood contexts, and access to local and transnational co-ethnic communities and labor markets. These forces not only shape the kinds of opportunities available to undocumented young adults, but how they choose to approach disclosing their undocumented status and interact with family, peers, employers, professors, and police. 

Aptekar and Hsin pay particular attention to the effect of one’s mode of entry into the United States, highlighting the distinction between visa overstayers and those who entered the country without inspection. This highly consequential divide shapes early experiences of illegality, labor market options, exposure to surveillance and precarity, and the possibility of adjusting status. Individuals who overstay their visas have more avenues to adjust their undocumented status, including family sponsorship and marriage to U.S. citizens. Opportunities for legalization are much more restricted for those who made unauthorized border crossings. If these immigrant youth want to adjust their status, they are required to leave the country and remain abroad for at least ten years to do so. Other methods of adjusting their status, such as claiming extreme hardship on their American families or trying to obtain visas for victims of crime or parental abuse or neglect, are extremely difficult to obtain, costly, and can lead to division in families, making legalization all but impossible and, therefore, limiting youths’ opportunities. Thus, mode of entry strongly influences how some young adults imagine their future lives in the U.S. and beyond.

Beyond Dreamers deftly underscores how deeply legal uncertainty continues to structure the lives of undocumented young adults.

In Permeable Hospitals, medical sociologist Susan E. Bell makes an original contribution to understanding a complex and urgent global health issue – caring for an increasingly diverse and mobile patient population. Bell identifies the twenty-first-century hospital as the center of a complex network of social and health care interactions among patients and medical communities that are distinguished by transnational movement. She examines how culture and language are negotiated during face-to-face interactions in outpatient visits at one Maine hospital and shows how caring is done for refugee and immigrant patients. To capture this process, Bell advances a new theoretical framework, that twenty-first-century hospitals are nodes in transnational social networks. During appointments, temporary combinations of people, objects, practices, and ideas assemble at the hospital and disperse at the appointment’s end. Because the interactions take place in a teaching hospital, the thinking that underlies diagnosis and treatment is made explicit and evaluated in backstage teaching areas where residents report about their patients to senior physicians. Bell's landmark book is based on a qualitative study that included nine months at the hospital observing interactions among adult New Mainer patients and clinicians, interpreters, and staff.

What happens when we move beyond a Black-and-white understanding of racism? This provocative book challenges conventional narratives by exploring how Mexican Americans navigate the US racial hierarchy—not simply as victims of white supremacy but as complex participants in systems of racial oppression. Tracing the construction of race from colonial regimes to the present, author Bianca Sofia Rubalcava argues that non-Black people of color, particularly Mexican Americans, often negotiate their racial position by distancing themselves from Blackness. Through legal history, social movement archives, and survey data, this work reveals how anti-Blackness has persisted across borders and generations, from the pursuit of legal whiteness to enduring family biases around interracial relationships. Ultimately, the book offers a powerful critique of how anti-Black ideologies hinder cross-racial solidarity and perpetuate marginalization. A bold and necessary intervention, this study pushes the Latinx community—and all readers—to confront complicity and reimagine racial justice in more inclusive and transformative ways.

California has long been mythologized as the quintessential land of opportunity and reinvention—a place where anyone, regardless of origin, can forge a new life and realize their aspirations. Yet beneath this gilded narrative lies a starker reality: California ranks among the most unequal states in one of the world's most unequal countries, where the middle class finds itself increasingly squeezed. Economic inequality is not an anomaly but part of a broader global phenomenon, as disparities deepen across the world. While we know a lot about its contours, its evolution over time and its intersections with race and immigration, we understand far less about how ordinary people interpret and internalize it. In Normalizing Inequality, sociologists G. Cristina Mora and Tianna S. Paschel illuminate how middle-class Californians perceive and come to accept the inequalities that surround them.

Drawing on extensive interviews and surveys, Mora and Paschel uncover a profound paradox at the heart of middle-class consciousness. They find that Californians are keenly aware of the systemic causes of inequality—they recognize policies engineered to benefit the wealthy, they acknowledge how structural racism makes it hard for some groups to get ahead—yet they consistently minimize these forces. Instead, they gravitate toward explanations rooted in individualism, moral character, and the idea that things are worse in other places. Racism and racial inequality in California become palatable when framed as "not as bad as the South." Immigrant exploitation, however severe, transforms into evidence of the American Dream fulfilled simply upon arrival. Economic pressures that displace others become surmountable through personal industriousness and forbearance.

These beliefs about inequality grow more troubling still. Middle-class Californians sometimes blame disempowered people for their circumstances—acknowledging structural barriers facing homeless and undocumented populations while simultaneously faulting them for insufficient drive or criminal behavior that compounds their difficulties. When contemplating California's future, interviewees envision economic prosperity propelled by technological innovation, yet remain curiously unconcerned with how present inequalities might shape that tomorrow. Their imagined future is one where White and Asian American populations thrive, while Black, Latino, and economically marginalized Californians either vanish through displacement or fade into irrelevance. As respondents use these interpretive frameworks to make sense of inequality, they lean heavily on California's foundational narratives of opportunity, sanctuary and multiracial promise.

Normalizing Inequality offers an incisive examination of how ordinary citizens make sense of inequality and, through that very process of sense-making, how they tolerate and passively reproduce the conditions they often claim to deplore.

Stereotyped as “model minorities” who excel in the classroom, Asian Americans are more highly educated than all other U.S. groups. Once in the labor market, they outearn White Americans. Some believe this is evidence that White privilege, racial bias, and gender discrimination are fictitious narratives of a liberal “woke” agenda. Others use it as proof that confirms their stereotypes that Asian Americans are inherently smarter and harder working than other groups. While much attention has focused on Asian Americans’ academic achievement, far less research considers whether their later careers mirror their early success. In this issue of RSF, sociologists Jennifer Lee, Kimberly Goyette, Xi Song, and Yu Xie, management scholar Jackson G. Lu, and an interdisciplinary group of contributors examine how Asian Americans fare in the workplace.

The ten articles in this issue examine the ways in which Asian Americans, due to geographic clustering, are advantaged at a national level but disadvantaged at the regional level, how gender, family, and marriage impact Asian Americans in the workplace, and the different ways Asian Americans strategically adapt to the labor market. Robert Manduca and Jane Furey reveal that while, on average, Asian Americans outearn White Americans at a national level, when compared to Whites living in the same metropolitan area, Asians earn only 88 percent as much. Sharon Sassler and Gabrielle Sorresso find that among computer science professionals, Indian women have a larger gender wage gap than White and Chinese women and experience larger marriage and parenthood penalties in earnings. Sojung Lim and Wonjeong Jeong show that Asian women are more likely to live with extended family than White women, leading to higher rates of employment among Asian women with children. Angelina Grigoryeva finds that while Asian Americans are more likely to receive stock-based compensation than White Americans, this is because they are more likely to work in jobs where stock options are provided. Asians and Whites working in the same types of jobs are equally likely to receive stock-based compensation and in similar amounts. Shih-Chun Chien and colleagues find that despite being the fastest-growing racial minority group entering the legal profession, Asian Americans are underrepresented in leadership positions. They find this pattern is attributed, in part, to employers’ pervasive stereotypes that Asian Americans lack traits typically associated with leadership, such as creativity and assertiveness.

This issue of RSF reveals that the perception of the Asian American advantage in the workplace is illusory and sheds light on the lived experiences of the “model minority” when they go to work.

School choice promises to free families from the limits of where they live. The Scarcity Loop asks what happens when that promise is made in school systems where more children seek desirable schools than those schools can serve. Focused on New York City’s high school admissions system, sociologist Jennifer L. Jennings argues that choice becomes another way to ration scarce educational opportunity, shifting where rationing happens, who must manage it, and how families understand the outcomes that follow.

Jennings begins with the admissions process itself. New York City asks every eighth grader to choose from hundreds of options. On paper, the system offers extraordinary possibility. But that possibility still has to be converted into a seat. Someone has to learn the rules, compare schools, manage deadlines, make trips, and decide how much risk a thirteen-year-old can bear. Jennings calls this the work of getting in and shows that the capacity to do that work is not evenly distributed. Some families enter choice systems with the fluency and flexibility to turn options into opportunity. Others confront it with fewer supports and far less room for error. Some teenagers shoulder decisions with little adult help. Counselors translate complicated rules under impossible constraints. Principals are not passive actors. Jennings shows how they recruit and adapt as they try to build schools families will choose while managing demand and reputation.

Jennings contends that reforms meant to expand access can reorganize the very competition they aim to resolve. As one barrier recedes, another becomes more consequential. Residence matters less, but advantage does not disappear; it travels through information, timing, and familiarity with the rules. Inequality persists not because nothing changes, but because advantage finds new points of entry as reforms change rules. As the work of securing opportunity shifts, so do understandings of inequality. Unequal outcomes can come to look less like consequences of how educational opportunities are organized and more like reflections of how families navigate the system.

Drawing on more than 450 interviews, participant observation, administrative data, and archival research, The Scarcity Loop follows students, parents, counselors, and principals as they navigate school choice at scale. Jennings traces who must do the work of making choice real, clarifying what is at stake when public education becomes something families must know how to secure.

The Scarcity Loop skillfully shows the consequences of scarcity in public education on schools and families, and reveals how scarcity reproduces itself, even when reforms are sincere.

JENNIFER L. JENNINGS is the Class of 1988 Professor in Domestic Policy and Professor of Sociology and Public Affairs, Princeton University

Despite calls from industry associations for a diverse workforce to meet a changing client base, racial and gendered occupational segregation persists in the veterinary profession. As of 2018, nearly 90% of veterinarians identify as White and more than 70% are women. Adilia James explains the causes and effects of this growing and alarming trend in Vetting for Passion.

James interviews aspiring and employed veterinarians about why marginalized groups are, ironically, not making equitable progress in an elite labor market that encourages diversity and inclusion policies. She shows how cultural and structural barriers exclude people of color from the profession and how relationships with animals are used as racialization tools. People of color are also hindered by factors such as social and lived experiences, the debt-to-income ratio, and an uncomfortable working environment.

Additionally, James finds that hiring managers, veterinary schools, and mentors rely on “constrained choice narratives” to justify their assumption that only White women are likely to appreciate the unique benefits of a career in veterinary medicine, leading these gatekeepers to excuse their opportunity hoarding as benevolent.

Vetting for Passion offers a critical case study of a profession whose associations, colleges, and workplaces justify and perpetuate a culture of racial exclusion.