Deportees, more than other potential migrants, are particularly likely to have strong family connections to the United States. It is important to study deportee decision-making because of the unique nature of deportees’ connections to the U.S. and to family members living there. While it is known that familial connections play a large role in deportee migration motivation, the complexity of this motivation remains underexplored. Why do some deportees with family in the U.S. attempt to cross the border, while others do not? How does the nature of the familial bond affect the decision to migrate? How does deportees’ experience with the American carceral system affect their dedication to family, and thus their motivation to migrate? My qualitative examination of deportee interview transcripts shows that, for many, the desire to reunite with family is often prioritized over other practical considerations. My main argument is that deportees who have outwardly similar cross-border family connections are inclined towards different migration decisions depending on their level of emotional attachment towards family members in the U.S. Affectual connection to family appears to take precedence over issues of stigma or status, and over notions of national affiliation with the U.S. or Mexico. In some cases, emotional connections can be severely strained and degraded by the aspects of the deportation process, especially lengthy incarcerations. Not only is this breakdown of family ties extremely painful for the parents, children, and other family members; it likely also has a corrosive effect on overall societal stability.

This investigation examines a teachers’ local (local 22 of the National Union of Education Workers of Mexico (SNTE)) in the Mexican state of Oaxaca and the effects of repression on the oligarchization of local 22. Using sociologist Robert Michels’ theory of oligarchization known as the “iron law of oligarchy”—which claims that any democratic organization that becomes large enough to bureaucratize will inevitably become an oligarchy—as a framework, this investigation makes the argument that external influences, specifically government repression, can force an organization to become oligarchic, thus occupying an important, yet unexplored space within the “iron law” theory. Michels’ theory focuses on an organizations’ internal issues such as bureaucratization, centralization of power, and technical specialization of job positions as the factors that push an organization to become oligarchic without accounting for external issues faced by organizations that can also influence a shift to oligarchy. Through historical research, interviews of local 22 members, and observations carried out in Oaxaca City this investigation argues that intense government repression and violence against local 22 beginning in 2006 and continuing for the next ten years significantly affected local 22’s shift toward oligarchy, more so than the bureaucratization and centralization that took place within the local.

This thesis explores the complexities of racialization as applied to Central American asylum seekers who have been forcibly stranded at the border in recent years. These communities are affected by a variety of political, social, and cultural systems that place them at a great disadvantage in achieving a fair quality of life. An examination of the traits on which Central American asylum seekers face discrimination, which I describe as an effect of racialization, shows that their experiences are unique to their situation in their time and place. Derailing from the common association of racialization by physical traits in Mexico, these communities at the border are more affected by racialization for their nationality, for being a migrant, and for their accent and/or manner of speaking. I identify the perpetrators of mistreatment against Central American asylum seekers and find that while immigration enforcement officials are easily distinguishable, it is much more difficult to determine who indeed forms part of Mexican authorities, the general public, and organized crime groups. Perpetrators can blur the lines between groups: a deceitful tactic in gaining power over these vulnerable populations. I also examine the repercussions of discrimination perpetrated by the actors discussed. Through my analysis, I contend that discrimination not only inflicts significant psychological harm on asylum seekers, but also obstructs their access to essential services, equitable working conditions, and fair housing. I argue that discrimination perpetuates a cycle of marginalization and reinforces existing inequalities, exacerbating the challenges faced by these populations.

This dissertation investigates the sources of political power among Mexican forced returnees during two significant periods of expulsions from the United States: The Great Depression and the Great Recession. Through the qualitative analysis of secondary sources, archival documents, government statistics, interviews with forced returnees, and field observation notes, this mixed-methods research provides a comparative historical analysis of how returnees mobilize embodied remittances (non-financial resources accumulated abroad) to legitimize their socio-political incorporation.Key findings from this investigation reveal three critical sociological insights into forced returnees' political mobilization. First, the type of embodied assets remitted shapes returnees' approaches to citizenship. Individuals with less transferable skills employ affective narratives of belonging to establish civic entitlement, while those with marketable skills use instrumental discourses to present themselves as contributors to the origin country’s workforce and society. Second, the implementation of political remittances—another form of embodied capital—is influenced by a foreign-established sense of political efficacy. Returnees with positive interactions with American institutions are more likely to participate in collective political mobilization than those with negative experiences, particularly with the American justice system. Third, the transferability of embodied remittances significantly impacts the extent and type of political involvement. Returnees with transferable skills confidently leverage their potential to contribute to economic and cultural development, exhibiting bolder political behaviors. Conversely, those with less transferable skills adopt cautious political strategies, focusing on achievable gradual changes. This work contributes to understanding the transnational dimensions of political mobilization, emphasizing the interplay between migration experiences and the pursuit of socio-political incorporation in the homeland. The study illustrates how forced returnees use their embodied remittances as organizational and symbolic resources to gain political leverage and advocate for their rights, mapping diverse pathways of social and political integration.