For forced migrants, what does it mean to belong in a new place? Drawing on twelve months of participant observation and twenty-two interviews with six Syrian refugee families resettled in the south-eastern United States, I find that participants identify security as a central dimension and mechanism of belonging. I introduce the concept of ‘secure belonging’ to theorise the freedom from physical danger, fear and anxiety that is central to participants’ belonging in a new place. Mechanisms of linguistic and cultural security, financial security and legal security strengthen participants’ civic, social and emotional attachments, while insecurity causes their sense of belonging to waver. By situating security as a central dimension of belonging and examining mechanisms of security for processes of belonging, this paper furthers our theoretical understanding of belonging’s multidimensionality, situational and subjective nature and variation by gender and life course stage. The introduction of the concept of secure belonging builds upon existing literature on security, belonging and migration, explores a new dimension and mechanisms of existing analytical frameworks and emphasises the centrality of security in the immigrant incorporation process.

This article problematizes a particular category in immigration politics: refugee. Drawing on a content analysis of 356 television news segments that aired on five major news networks between 1980 and 2016, we examine how the category “refugee” has been used in public discourse, to whom it has been applied, and the factors that shape characterizations of those who receive the label. While existing research finds that the media disproportionately associate the term “immigrant” with economic, criminal, and national security threats, we find that U.S. television news coverage associates the term “refugee” with sympathy. We find that these sympathetic portrayals are contingent upon and most common in stories about migrants in distant locales. When the news media cover individuals likely to settle or who are already settled in the United States, coverage takes a more negative tone. We also find evidence that U.S. border politics and foreign political interests affect which migrants receive the refugee label and how they are portrayed. We conclude with implications for the sociological study of classification and for immigration politics more generally.

Studies show that a nexus exists between racialized campus experiences, racial-ethnic identity, and engagement in campus activities for Black college men and shapes their perceptions about an institution's commitment to support the communities they represent. Yet, there is limited knowledge about how this nexus may unfold ecologically for this student population during their undergraduate experience. Using the Phenomenological Variant Ecological System Theory, this qualitative study describes how 31 Black college males leveraged their identities to manage self and societal appraisals, cope with stress experienced in university programs, and navigate feelings of marginalization and sense of belonging during their undergraduate experience.

Executive Summary: For many non-immigrants in the United States, adjusting one’s legal status to lawful permanent residence through employment-sponsorship is a unique and attractive pathway to permanent residence and prospective citizenship in the United States. However, amidst an uncertain future for non-immigrant temporary work visas, tech layoffs, and stalled legislative immigration reform, many non-immigrant visa-holders are leaving the United States and taking their talent with them. This paper specifically examines visa and immigration processing delays for employment-sponsored adjustments of status to lawful permanent residence in the United States between 2007 and 2019. Based on descriptive analysis and discrete time event history models of data posted to an online immigration forum I call “Immigration Journey,” I document how immigrant visa-holders’ waiting in the U.S. immigration bureaucracy for employment-based immigrant visa processing reflects and reproduces racial, educational, and socioeconomic hierarchies and inequities. I find that immigrants from countries of origin with smaller populations, higher skill levels, and those able to pay for premium processing have higher likelihoods of a quick adjustment of status decision. Conversely, immigrants from countries of origin with larger populations or those with lower skill levels are left waiting longer for their adjustment of status decisions — even when they pay for premium processing of their petition for an immigrant visa. Based on this finding, I introduce the concept of a hierarchy of waiting to illustrate the ways in which legislation and inequitable administrative policies in U.S. immigrant visa processing become mechanisms of waiting. By doing so, this paper makes a theoretical contribution for understanding stratification within the employment-based immigrant visa pathway and highlights how this hierarchy of waiting exacerbates inequalities in immigration more broadly. The empirical findings and conceptualization of a hierarchy of waiting inform policy recommendations for: 1. legislative reform of country caps for lawful permanent residence; 2. legislative reform of preference category caps for lawful permanent residence; 3. increased funding for United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) processing; and 4. increased transparency and communication of USCIS processes. Such policy changes would make immigrant visa availability and USCIS processing more equitable for future lawful permanent residents and citizens who are eligible to adjust their status through employment-based and other immigrant visa preference categories. Streamlined changes to the U.S. immigration legislation and administrative processes are critical for the United States’ future innovation and growth.

In 2023, there were approximately 32 million refugees globally. Nine out of the ten countries with the highest origins of refugees were in the Global South; conversely, only three of the ten countries hosting the highest numbers of refugees were in the Global North. In this study, we introduce the conceptual framework of a global division of responsibility sharing to describe how functions of Global North countries as permanent “resettlement” countries and Global South countries as perpetual countries of “asylum” and “transit” constitute unequal burdens with unequal protections for refugees. We illustrate—theoretically and empirically—how the structural positions of state actors in a global network introduce and reify a global division in refugee flows. Empirically, we test and develop this framework with network analysis of refugee flows to countries of asylum from 1990 to 2015 in addition to employing data on monetary donations to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) from 2017 to 2021. We (1) provide evidence of the structure and role of intermediary countries in refugee flows and (2) examine how UNHCR monetary aid conditions intermediary countries’ role of routing and transit. We illustrate how network constraints and monetary donations affect and constitute a global division in the management of historic and contemporary international refugee flows and explore the consequences of this global division for refugees’ access to resources and social and human rights.