By: Christiana Best-Giacomini, Ph.D.
August 7, 2026
The demographic landscape of the United States has changed dramatically over the past sixty years. A major turning point came with the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, which abolished the national origins quota system that had long favored immigrants from Northern and Western Europe. The law opened new pathways for immigrants from Asia, Africa, Latin America, and the Caribbean, fundamentally reshaping the nation’s population.
Passed during the Civil Rights Movement, the 1965 Act reflected a broader effort to move away from immigration policies that explicitly favored people of European ancestry. Since then, debates over immigration have continued to raise questions about who should be welcomed into the United States and who should receive priority.
Today, another question deserves careful consideration: Are current immigration policies disproportionately affecting immigrants of color?
The federal government’s expanded immigration enforcement efforts have overwhelmingly affected immigrants from Latin America, the Caribbean, Africa, and other regions of the Global South because these populations make up a share of the undocumented population and many of those targeted for enforcement. This also raises questions about who is welcomed into the country and who is expected to wait on the proverbial line indefinitely. For example, while refugee admissions were largely suspended, White South Africans were admitted as refugees. Meanwhile, immigration raids, workplace enforcement actions, detention, and deportation are reported far more often in communities of color than in predominantly White communities.
This does not, by itself, prove that enforcement is based on race. It does, however, raise important questions about whether immigration policies have unequal racial and ethnic consequences.
For Caribbean Americans, these questions are especially important. Caribbean immigrants have been important contributors to U.S. communities and economies in both skilled and unskilled occupations while helping build the United States as nurses, teachers, health care workers, construction workers, business owners, military veterans, social workers, and entrepreneurs. Yet many Caribbean families also include U.S. citizens, lawful permanent residents, temporary visa holders, and those who are unauthorized. As a result, immigration enforcement often affects entire families and communities, not just those facing removal.
History reminds us that immigration and citizenship laws have never been entirely race-neutral. The Naturalization Act of 1790 limited naturalization to “free white persons.” It was followed by the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 and the national origins quota system established in 1924 before the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 dismantled those explicit preferences. Together, these laws demonstrate how race and immigration policy have long been intertwined in American history.
More recent immigration policies have raised additional concerns. Recent travel restrictions have disproportionately affected several African and Muslim-majority countries, while many publicly identified third-country deportation agreements involve African countries, Latin America, and the Caribbean, with comparatively few involving Europe or Central Asia. Although these policies are justified on national security, diplomatic, or immigration enforcement grounds, their geographic concentration has led many scholars, civil rights advocates, and affected communities to question whether they disproportionately affect people of color.
Supporters of mass deportation argue that removing unauthorized immigrants will create more opportunities for U.S. citizens. One public official summarized this view with the phrase, “American jobs for American people.”
That argument raises another question: Who will fill the nearly 5.9 million jobs left vacant? Which occupations will continue to be considered undesirable? How will automation reshape employment opportunities for American workers? Will the benefits be distributed equitably, or will long-standing racial and economic inequalities reappear in new forms?
Throughout American history, race and labor have been closely connected. From slavery and Jim Crow to the recruitment of immigrant workers, certain groups have repeatedly performed society’s most difficult and least desirable jobs. As policymakers debate the future of immigration, it is reasonable to ask whether today’s policies could reproduce old patterns of inequality under new legal and political circumstances.
Whether current immigration enforcement represents a necessary exercise of immigration law or contributes to unequal racial outcomes deserves thoughtful discussion grounded in evidence rather than political rhetoric. In a democracy, we should ask not only who is being deported, but also why, how, and what the long-term consequences will be for American families, communities, and the nation.
(Dr Christiana Best is an Associate Professor at the University of Saint Joseph, Connecticut)
Email your opinions, letters and commentaries to: letters@caribmagplus.com