Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-lvtdw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-15T22:17:59.376Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Intersectional Coalitions: The Paradoxes of Rights-Based Movement Building in LGBTQ and Immigrant Communities

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2024

Erin M. Adam
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Over the past decade, inter- and intra-movement coalitions composed of organizations within the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer (LGBTQ) and immigrant rights movements have formed at the local level. These coalitions speak to a massive organizing effort that has achieved some rights campaign successes. However, coalition unity that culminated in “wins” like marriage equality came at a cost. While both movements expanded and unified, they simultaneously ossified around goals that matter to the most privileged segments of their respective communities. The result is a paradox: coalitions do sometimes form within and across movements, promote enduring unity across seemingly divergent movements, and facilitate rights campaign “wins.” However, coalitions simultaneously reinforce hierarchical exclusions through the continued marginalization of issues that uproot conventional power dynamics, like police violence, economic inequality, and gender justice. This essay argues that the construction of a common “civil rights past” identity within coalitions can help to explain this paradox. The development of this collective identity expands movements, occasionally thwarting the power dynamics responsible for the centering of the interests of the most privileged constituencies within social movements. However, the episodic nature of rights-based campaigns simultaneously contains and undermines the formation of this collective identity, reinforcing movement divisions based on race, gender, and class.

Type
Articles
Information
Law & Society Review , Volume 51 , Issue 1 , March 2017 , pp. 132 - 167
Copyright
© 2017 Law and Society Association.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

The author gratefully acknowledges the assistance and encouragement of George Lovell and Michael McCann as well as Chandan Reddy, Rachel Cichowski, Naomi Murakawa, and Dara Strolovitch who provided feedback and support at various stages of this study. The author would also like to thank members of the Comparative Law and Society Studies Center at the University of Washington (UW), especially Heather Evans and Tanya Kawarki who provided feedback on early versions of this essay in a writing group and Katherine Beckett, Steve Herbert, Stephen Meyers, Arzoo Osanloo, and Carolyn Pinedo-Turnovsky whose comments during a workshare helped develop this essay. The author is further grateful for the constructive comments of numerous academic conference attendees and discussants, especially Anna-Maria Marshall, Michael Bosia, Scott Barclay, Shauna Fisher, and Zein Murib, and various anonymous reviewers. The author would also like to thank the Harry Bridges Center for Labor Studies and the Department of Political Science at the University of Washington for the grant funding necessary to complete this study. Finally, and most importantly, the author would like to thank the organization leaders, advocates, community workers, and activists who participated in this study, whose incredible movement-building in the face of seemingly insurmountable odds she is in complete awe of and whose amazing work in the struggle against oppression far surpasses the confines of academic research.

References

Albiston, Catherine (2009) “Institutional Inequality,” 5 Wisconsin Law Rev. 1093–167.Google Scholar
Andersen, Ellen Ann (2006) Out of the Closets and into the Courts: Legal Opportunity Structure and Gay Rights Litigation. Ann Arbor, MI: Univ. of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Arizona Together (2008) “Supporters,” Arizona Together. Available at: https://web.archive.org/web/20110725032643/http://www.aztogether.org/supporters/ (accessed 5 October 2015)Google Scholar
Associated Press (2014) “Obama Ends Secure Communities Program That Helped Hike Deportations,” NBC News. Available at: http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/immigration-reform/obama-ends-secure-communities-program-helped-hike-deportations-n253541 (accessed 21 November 2014).Google Scholar
Bagenstos, Samuel R. (2006) “The Structural Turn and the Limits of Antidiscrimination Law,” 94 California Law Rev. 1–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernstein, Mary, Marshall, Anna-Maria, & Barclay, Scott (2009) “The Challenge of Law: Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity, and Social Movements,” in Barclay, S., Bernstein, M., & Marshall, A., eds., Queer Mobilizations: LGBT Activists Confront the Law. New York: New York Univ. Press. 1–20.Google Scholar
Brown, Wendy (1995) States of Injury: Power and Freedom in Late Modernity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, Kristina M. (2011) “The Road to S.B. 1070: How Arizona Became Ground Zero for the Immigrants’ Rights Movement and the Continuing Struggle for Latino Civil Rights in America,” 14 Harvard Latino Law Rev. 1–21.Google Scholar
Chávez, Karma (2013) Queer Migration Politics: Activist Rhetoric and Coalitional Possibilities. Champaign, IL: Univ. of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Cho, Sumi, Williams Crenshaw, Kimberlé, & McCall, Leslie (2013) “Toward a Field of Intersectionality Studies: Theory, Applications, and Praxis,” 38 Signs: J. of Women in Culture and Society 785–810.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chua, Lynette J. (2014) Mobilizing Gay Singapore: Rights and Resistance in an Authoritarian State. Singapore: National Univ. of Singapore Press.Google Scholar
Cohen, Cathy J. (1999) Boundaries of Blackness: AIDS and the Breakdown of Black Politics. Chicago, IL: Univ. of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohn, Marjorie (2012) “Racial Profiling Legalized in Arizona,” 1 Columbia J. of Race and Law 168–86.Google Scholar
Collins, Patricia Hill (1989) “The Social Construction of Black Feminist Thought,” 14 Signs: A J. of Women in Culture and Society 745–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cornfield, Daniel B., & McCammon, Holly J. (2010) “Approaching Merger: The Converging Public Policy Agendas of the AFL and CIO, 1938-1955,” in Van Dyke, N., & McCammon, H., eds., Strategic Alliances: Coalition Building and Social Movements. Minneapolis, MN: Univ. of Minnesota Press. 79–98.Google Scholar
Crenshaw, Kimberlé (1989) “Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory, and Antiracist Politics,” 8 Univ. of Chicago Legal Forum 139–67.Google Scholar
Crenshaw, Kimberlé (1991) “Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence against Women of Color,” 43 Stanford Law Rev. 1241–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cummings, Scott L., & NeJaime, Douglas (2010) “Lawyering for Marriage Equality,” 57 UCLA Law Rev. 1235–331.Google Scholar
Díaz, Elvia (2004) “Prop. 200: Will It Protect Arizona?” The Arizona Republic. Available at: http://www.azcentral.com/news/election/special2/articles/0919prop200-details19.html (accessed 19 September 2004).Google Scholar
Dorf, Michael, & Tarrow, Sidney (2014) “Strange Bedfellows: How an Anticipatory Countermovement Brought Same-Sex Marriage into the Public Arena,” 39 Law & Social Inquiry 449–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duam, Courtenay W. (2009) “Deciding under the Influence? The “One Hit Wonders” and Organized-Interest Participation in U.S. Supreme Court Gay Rights Litigation,” in Barclay, S., Bernstein, M., & Marshall, A., eds., Queer Mobilizations: LGBT Activists Confront the Law. New York: New York Univ. Press. 76–102.Google Scholar
Duggan, Lisa (2003) The Twilight of Equality? Neoliberalism, Cultural Politics, and the Attack on Democracy. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Eng, David L. (2010) The Feeling of Kinship: Queer Liberalism and the Racialization of Intimacy. Durham, CT: Duke Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Engel, David M. (1984) “The Oven Bird's Song: Insiders, Outsiders, and Personal Injuries in an American Community,” 18 Law & Society Rev. 551–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ernst, Rose (2010) The Price of Progressive Politics: The Welfare Rights Movement in an Era of Colorblind Racism. New York: New York Univ. Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eskridge, William (2002) Equality Practice: Civil Unions and the Future of Gay Rights. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Fetner, Tina (2008) How the Religious Right Shaped Lesbian and Gay Activism. Minneapolis, MN: Univ. of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Fisher, Shauna (2009) “It Takes (at Least) Two to Tango: Fighting with Words in the Conflict over Same-Sex Marriage,” in Barclay, S., Bernstein, M., & Marshall, A., eds., Queer Mobilizations: LGBT Activists Confront the Law. New York: New York Univ. Press. 231–56.Google Scholar
Gleeson, Shannon (2012) Conflicting Commitments: The Politics of Enforcing Immigrant Worker Rights in San Jose and Houston. Ithaca, NY: Cornell Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Goldberg-Hiller, Jonathan (2004) The Limits to Union: Same-Sex Marriage and the Politics of Civil Rights. Ann Arbor, MI: The Univ. of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Hancock, Ange-Marie (2016) Intersectionality: An Intellectual History. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hardin, Bill (2014) “SB 1062 Is a Radical Law That Hurts Arizona,” The Arizona Republic. Available at: http://archive.azcentral.com/opinions/articles/20140224sb-creates-radical-change-hurts-ariz.html (accessed 24 February 2014).Google Scholar
Harris, Cheryl I. (1993) “Whiteness as Property,” 106 Harvard Law Rev. 1701–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hesson, Ted (2012) “As One Immigration Enforcement Program Fades Away, Another Rises,” ABC News. Available at: http://abcnews.go.com/ABC_Univision/News/immigration-enforcement-program-287g-scaled-back/story?id=18077757 (accessed 27 December 2012).Google Scholar
Internal Revenue Service (2016a) Exemption Requirements - 501(c)(3) Organizations. Available at: https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/charitable-organizations/exemption-requirements-section-501-c-3-organizations (accessed 15 November 2016).Google Scholar
Internal Revenue Service (2016b) Types of Organizations Exempt Under Section 501(c)(4). Available at: https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/other-non-profits/types-of-organizations-exempt-under-section-501-c-4 (accessed 15 November 2016).Google Scholar
Isaac, Larry (2010) “Policing Capital: Armed Countermovement Coalitions against Labor in Late Nineteenth-Century Industrial Cities,” in Van Dyke, N., & McCammon, H., eds., Strategic Alliances: Coalition Building and Social Movements. Minneapolis, MN: Univ. of Minnesota Press. 22–49.Google Scholar
Johnson, Kevin R. (2012) “A Case Study of Color-Blindness: The Racially Disparate Impacts of Arizona's S.B. 1070 and the Failure of Comprehensive Immigration Reform,” 2 UC Irvine Law Rev. 313–58.Google Scholar
Kandaswamy, Priya (2008) “State Austerity and the Racial Politics of Same-Sex Marriage in the U.S,” 11 Sexualities 706–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keck, Thomas M. (2009) “Beyond Backlash: Assessing the Impact of Judicial Decisions on LGBT Rights,” 43 Law & Society Rev. 151–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klarman, Michael J. (2014) From the Closet to the Altar: Courts, Backlash, and the Struggle for Same-Sex Marriage. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Klarman, Michael J. (2004) From Jim Crow to Civil Rights: The Supreme Court and the Struggle for Racial Equality. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Levitsky, Sandra R. (2007) “Niche Activism: Constructing a Unified Movement Identity in a Heterogeneous Organizational Field,” 12 Mobilization 271–86.Google Scholar
Logue, Josh (2015) “Latina/o/x.” Inside Higher Ed. Available at: https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2015/12/08/students-adopt-gender-nonspecific-term-latinx-be-more-inclusive (accessed 8 December 2015).Google Scholar
Mansbridge, Jane R. (1986) Why We Lost the ERA. Chicago, IL: The Univ. of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marshall, Anna-Maria, & Barclay, Scott (2003) “In Their Own Words: How Ordinary People Construct the Legal World,” 28 Law & Social Inquiry 617-28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCammon, Holly J., & Van Dyke, Nella (2010) “Applying Qualitative Comparative Analysis to Empirical Studies of Social Movement Coalition Formation,” in Dyke, V., & McCammon, H., eds., Strategic Alliances: Coalition Building and Social Movements. Minneapolis, MN: Univ. of Minnesota Press. 292-315.Google Scholar
McCann, Michael (1994) Rights at Work: Pay Equity Reform and the Politics of Legal Mobilization. Chicago, IL: The Univ. of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Merry, Sally Engle (2000) Colonizing Hawai'i: The Cultural Power of Law. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
NeJaime, Douglas (2013) “Before Marriage: The Unexplored History of Nonmarital Recognition and Its Relationship to Marriage,” 102 California Law Rev. 87-172.Google Scholar
O'Hagan, Maureen (2013). “Unlikely Allies: Immigration, LGBT Groups Seek Equality,” Equal Voice 26 November.Google Scholar
Pinello, Daniel (2006) America's Struggle for Same-Sex Marriage. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Puar, Jasbir (2014) “Disability,” 1 Transgender Studies Q. 77-81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Puar, Jasbir (2011) “I Would Rather be a Cyborg than a Goddess’: Intersectionality, Assemblage, and Affective Politics,” 2 PhiloSOPHIA: A J. of Feminist Philosophy 49-66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Puar, Jasbir (2007) Terrorist Assemblages: Homonationalism in Queer Times. Durham, NC: Duke Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Reddy, Chandan (2011) Freedom from Violence: Race, Sexuality, and the US State. Durham, NC: Duke Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Rimmerman, Craig A. (2002) From Identity to Politics: The Lesbian and Gay Movements in the United States. Philadelphia, PA: Temple Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, Gerald N. (2008) The Hollow Hope: Can Courts Bring about Social Change? Chicago, IL: The Univ. of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanders, Rebekah L. (2013) “The History of Proposition 200,” The Arizona Republic. Available at: http://www.azcentral.com/news/politics/articles/20130316proposition-200-history-timeline.html (accessed 17 June 2013).Google Scholar
Scarborough, Senta, et al. (2008) The Arizona Republic. Available at: http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2008/06/27/20080627joe-arpaio-mesa-sweep.html (accessed 27 June 2008).Google Scholar
Scheingold, Stuart (1974) The Politics of Rights. Ann Arbor, MI: Univ. of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Simpson, Andrea Y. (1998) The Tie That Binds: Identity and Political Attitudes in the Post-Civil Rights Generation. New York: New York Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Spade, Dean (2011) Normal Life: Administrative Violence, Critical Trans Politics, and the Limits of Law. Brooklyn, NY: South End Press.Google Scholar
Stern, Ray (2011) “Feds Pull 287(g) Authority from Maricopa County Jails Because of Civil Rights Violations,” The Phoenix New Times. Available at: http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/feds-pull-287-g-authority-from-maricopa-county-jails-because-of-civil-rights-violations-6631025 (accessed 15 December 2015).Google Scholar
Stone, Amy L. (2012) Gay Rights at the Ballot Box. Minneapolis, MN: Univ. of Minnesota Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strolovitch, Dara Z. (2007) Affirmative Advocacy: Race, Class, and Gender in Interest Group Politics. Chicago, IL: Univ. of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
The Arizona Republic (2015) “Sheriff Arpaio: An In-Depth Look at ‘America's Toughest Sheriff,’” The Arizona Republic, Special Issue. Available at: http://www.azcentral.com/news/arpaio/arpaio-index.html (accessed 21 December 2016).Google Scholar
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (2016) Secure Communities. Available at: https://www.ice.gov/secure-communities#tab1 (accessed 4 November 2016).Google Scholar
Vote No on Prop 102 (2008) Partners against Prop 102. Available at: https://web.archive.org/web/20081227070843/ http://www.votenoprop102.com/web/index.php (accessed 5 October 2015).Google Scholar
Yoshino, Kenji (2000) “The Epistemic Contract of Bisexual Erasure,” 52 Stanford Law Rev. 405–06Google Scholar