BOOK REVIEW
Undocumented Immigrants and Higher Education, ¡Sí Se Puede! Alejandra
Rincón. New York: LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2008. 296 pp.

Alejandra Rincón’s Undocumented Immigrants and Higher Education,
¡Sí Se Puede! chronicles and analyzes one chapter in the on-going struggle
of immigrants to attain the equality they deserve as full-fledged members of
society—the effort to achieve state recognition of the right of undocumented
immigrants to in-state tuition to attend college in the states in which they
reside. The book should especially interest those involved in movements for
civil and human rights, and it should fit quite nicely into college or high
school courses studying those movements.
As of the turn of the century, no state formally recognized the right of
undocumented immigrants residing therein to in-state tuition for higher
education. While on their own some colleges and universities treated undocumented
immigrants as state residents for tuition purposes, most did not, and
some states expressly denied access to in-state tuition. Most undocumented
immigrants, even if they had grown up and been educated in the state, were
charged nonresident tuition. Since nonresident tuition is usually substantially
greater than in-state, the impact was to deprive many undocumented immigrants
who simply could not afford it of the opportunity for a college education.
Less than a decade later, 10 states, including those with the largest
immigrant populations (Texas, California, and New York), now have laws
enabling undocumented immigrants to attend college at in-state tuition rates.
These laws came about as a direct result of the collective efforts of the students
themselves, grassroots organizations promoting immigrant rights, teachers
and others who supported the cause, and supportive legislators. Rincón thoroughly
describes the efforts in the above three states, and discusses other
states to a lesser degree. She especially emphasizes “the critical role of advocacy
groups . . . [as] the cornerstone of efforts to open the doors of higher
education to undocumented immigrants” (p. 197). The reader comes away with
an in-depth understanding of what it takes to accomplish such an effort, typically
against great odds, in particular against the resistance of those who
oppose immigrant rights.
In this review I wish to highlight and elaborate a bit on the two principal
and interrelated themes in which Rincón situates the struggle to achieve instate
tuition for undocumented immigrants and which put the struggle in historical
perspective. These themes are an important aspect of the book, whose
372 Bilingual Research Journal
goal is not simply to present the past but also to contribute to the ongoing
struggle for civil and human rights for immigrants and others.
One theme is just that, that the struggle is an ongoing and overarching
one. The passage of laws granting undocumented immigrants in-state tuition
is not the end of the matter, but simply one phase of a continuing struggle to
ensure undocumented immigrants equal access to higher education, to secure
equal rights for all immigrants, and to advance the human rights of all the
disadvantaged and oppressed.
Laws granting in-state tuition have improved access to higher education
for undocumented immigrants residing therein, but they have not fully equalized
it. First, so far only 10 states have adopted such laws, leaving many more to
go. Second, the mere enactment of a law does not guarantee that it will be
properly implemented. Consequently, after passage of the in-state tuition
laws, advocates have had to engage in continuing efforts to educate university
officials and students about the laws and to ensure that they are carried out.
Third, most of the laws do not grant undocumented immigrants equal access
to state scholarships and loans available to residents. This forecloses for
many undocumented immigrants the opportunity to afford even in-state
tuition, which has risen substantially in most states in recent years.
Moreover, the struggle for equal access to education is not over, because
those opposed to in-state tuition for undocumented immigrants have not given
up. They have sought to challenge the laws in court, to seek their repeal, and to
invoke federal intervention against them as inconsistent with federal immigration
law. Just as there has been a retrenchment in recent years in the effort
to desegregate America’s schools, retrenchment is always possible here too.
To avoid that, the advocates of in-state tuition, as well as of any progressive
movement, must remain organized and vigilant and must be prepared to
struggle to maintain the gains already achieved as they strive to extend them
further.
It is not enough, however, to focus solely on the educational inequalities
facing undocumented immigrants. Immigrants in general, both documented
and undocumented, are also engaged in a struggle to attain equality in many
areas in addition to education, such as access to citizenship, legalization of
their status, access to health care and other social welfare programs, and the
respect of the community at large for their contributions to society. Those
struggles go hand in hand with the struggle for in-state tuition. If they are
lost, and if the anti-immigrant sentiment that still exists and has intensified
of late persists, then the gains of the movement for equal access to higher
education may well be lost as well and the possibility of further advances
forestalled.
Nor is it enough to focus solely on the rights of immigrants to the exclusion
of other struggles. As Rincón emphasizes, particular struggles cannot be
viewed or pursued separately if they are to succeed and sustain themselves,
but are part of and dependent on a larger struggle for equality. Unless all
Book Review 373
who are disadvantaged and oppressed support each others’ struggles, none is
likely to be fully realized as they compete against each other for limited
goods available in a nonegalitarian social order and as society’s power elites
pit them against each other so as to maintain their privileged position.
Rincón especially notes the connection between the struggle for immigrants’
rights and the African American civil rights movement. This is important for
several reasons. First, the civil rights movement has been the precursor of
and an example for many other movements, including those for women’s,
gay, and immigrant rights. All these movements can and have learned from
the successes and failures of the civil rights movement and of each other’s
struggles how to build and sustain a successful movement. Second, all these
movements are fundamentally about the same thing, i.e., human dignity.
Finally, the opponents of the civil rights and immigrants’ rights movements
have attempted to pit African Americans and immigrants, and especially
Hispanics, against each other in an effort to derail both movements.
Most prominently, they have claimed that low-wage workers from Latin
America have deprived African Americans of jobs and have lowered wages
and incomes. In fact, and unsurprisingly, those who study the issue disagree,
with some contending that immigration harms Black and other native workers
and others that it does not.1 If the contention were true, or if African Americans
believed it even if untrue, that would greatly undermine both movements
since both groups need each other’s support in their struggle for equality.
The question, then, is how to address this conundrum.
This leads to the book’s second major theme I wish to discuss. Much of
the debate over access of undocumented immigrants to higher education, and
over immigration in general, has revolved around the question of whether
immigrants help or hurt the country economically. Rincón asserts that attempting
to counter the opponents’ claims of economic detriment with claims to
the contrary is misguided, dehumanizing, and doomed to fail because “it
accepts the framework defined by the opposition” and because “arguments
of economic efficiency have been shown to be ineffective in advancing the
cause of freedom and equality” (p. 31). Similarly, she asserts that arguments
for in-state tuition for undocumented immigrants on the ground that it will
facilitate their assimilation into society accept the cultural imperialism of nativist
opponents and “undervalue immigrant cultures” (p. 204). Instead, she asserts,
the case for immigrant rights should focus on civil rights and human dignity,
on “the degree to which immigrants enrich the cultural, political, and social
experience of life in the United States” (p. 204), and on the relationship of
the struggle for in-state tuition “toward the even larger goal of equal opportunity
for all” (p. 214).
While I agree wholeheartedly with the centrality to the immigrants’
rights movement of arguments based on human dignity, self-determination,
and equality, I do not think it appropriate to overlook the relevance of economics
to the struggle. Nor do I think Rincón means to say that, although
374 Bilingual Research Journal
some readers may get that impression. In concluding this review, I wish to
try to clarify this point.
First, even though countering the opposition’s arguments about the economic
detriments of immigration accepts their framework to some degree, I
think it important to do so. Unfortunately, such arguments resonate with
many people. Not to respond to them at all may leave the impression that the
proponents of immigrants’ rights acknowledge their truth. Moreover, the
arguments are easily countered on their own terms. While there are studies
showing some economic detriments to immigration (Borjas, 1990; Camarota,
2004), in my opinion studies showing overall economic benefits have effectively
undermined the negative ones as incomplete and unsound (Fix & Passel,
1994; Kasarda & Johnson, 2006; Moore, 1998). Most importantly, the positive
economic arguments actually seem to have played a role in the passage
of the in-state tuition laws. Nevertheless, beyond countering the negative
economic claims, I think Rincón is certainly correct that the central focus in
organizing a movement for immigrant rights, and in making and sustaining
the case over time, must be that what is at stake are basic and fundamental
human rights.
Second, economic rights, such as the right to a job and the education to
attain the needed skills, are fundamental human rights. Moreover, economics
underlies the mistreatment that immigrants and others face. Slavery and segregation
were practiced for economic reasons, because they enriched and
helped sustain the dominance of this society’s power elite. Likewise, immigration
has an economic base. The entire development of this country, for
good and for bad, is ultimately a result of immigration. The changes in the
law that enabled the great wave of immigration the country has seen over the
past 20 years, during which time there have been more immigrants (most of
them documented) than in any comparable time period in its history,2 were
largely enacted for economic reasons. The continued economic viability of
the country depends on immigration.
The problem is that the immigration process is dominated by the society’s
power elite, such that it operates to their advantage. A substantial number of
the immigrants from some parts of the world, including Asia and Africa, are
actually better educated than the average American at the time of their
arrival. This contributes to the economic dominance of the United States
and the multinational corporations based there, and to the unequal and
uneven development characterizing the global economy, through a brain
drain from less-developed countries that have paid for the education of
those who leave and could serve to advance their countries’ development.
On the other hand, a substantial number of immigrants, including many of
the undocumented, are not well educated, are a source of cheap labor for the
country’s economic elites, and are used as scapegoats to divide the working
class and undermine workers’ movements to counter the power of economic
elites.
Book Review 375
Consequently, Rincón is right on in emphasizing the importance of solidarity
among immigrants, African Americans and other oppressed groups,
and the interrelatedness of all their struggles for dignity and equality. Without
solidarity, without ultimately a struggle to overcome the dominance of the
power elite, divisions will inevitably develop among the oppressed over the
limited goods available to the masses in a nonegalitarian and hierarchical
society. Thus, Rincón calls not just for in-state tuition for undocumented
immigrants but also for “defending access to higher education for all, and in
particular for minorities and underrepresented youth” (p. 212). To complete
the picture of what a movement for dignity and equality for all requires, we
might add that higher education should be free for all, that all should be entitled
and guaranteed to work at a living wage, that all should have access to
free and adequate health care.
Rincón’s fine book helps us to understand all that a movement for dignity
and equality for all entails, and that while not easy, a successful struggle
is possible, as exemplified by the successful albeit unfinished struggle of
undocumented immigrants for equal access to higher education.
Thomas Kleven
Southern Texas University
E-mail: tkleven@tmslaw.tsu.edu

Endnotes
1 Borjas (2003, 2004) and Borjas, Grogger, and Hanson (2006) conclude that immigration
adversely impacts the wages and incomes of native workers and especially
African Americans. Most other analysts conclude either that immigration has positive
impacts or insignificant negative impacts on native workers. See Capps, Fortuny &
Fix (2007); Card (2005); Ottaviano & Peri (2006); Raphael & Ronconi (2007). In
Card’s (2005) view “it is hard to argue that the aggregate time series evidence points
to a negative impact of immigration unless one starts from that position a priori.”
2 From 1988–2007 about 20 million people obtained legal permanent resident status.
The second greatest influx was about 15 million from 1895–1914. Yearbook of Immigration
Statistics: 2007, Table 1. As of January 2007 the estimated foreign-born population
was about 31 million, of whom 18 million were legal residents and about 12 million
were unauthorized (Hoefer, Rytina & Baker, 2008, Table 2).

References
Borjas, G.J. (1990). Friends or strangers: The impact of immigrants on the
U.S. economy. New York: Basic Books.
Borjas, G. J. (2003). The labor demand curve is downward sloping: Reexamining
the impact of immigration on the labor market. The Quarterly
Journal of Economics, 118(4), 1335–1374.
376 Bilingual Research Journal
Borjas, G. J. (2004). Increasing the supply of labor through immigration:
Measuring the impact on native-born workers. Retrieved January 29,
2009, from http:// www.cis.org/artices/2004/back504.html
Borjas, G. J., Grogger, J., & Hanson, G. H. (2006). Immigration and
African-American employment opportunities: The response of wages,
employment, and incarceration to labor supply shocks. Retrieved January
29, 2009, from http://ksghome.harvard.edu/∼GBorjas/Papers/Borjas,
Grogger,Hanson,2006.pdf
Camarota, S. (2004). The high cost of cheap labor: Illegal immigration and the federal
budget. Retrieved January 29, 2009, form http://www.cis.org/articles/
2004/fiscal.html
Capps, R., Fortuny, K., & Fix, M. (2007). Trends in the low-wage immigrant
labor force. Retrieved January 29, 2009, from http://www.urban.org/
UploadedPDF/411426_ Low-Wage_Immigrant_Labor.pdf
Card, D. (2005). Is the new immigration really so bad? The Economic Journal,
115(507), F300–F323.
Fix, M., & Passel, J. (1994). Immigration and immigrants: Setting the record
straight. Retrieved January 29, 2009, from http://www.urban.org/
UploadedPDF/305184_ immigration_immigrants.pdf
Hoefer, M., Rytina, N., & Baker, B. C. (2008). Estimates of the unauthorized
immigrant population residing in the United States. Retrieved January
29, 2009, from http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/publications/
ois_ill_pe_2007.pdf
Kasarda, J. D., & Johnson, J. H. (2006). The economic impact of the Hispanic
population on the State of North Carolina. Retrieved January 29, 2009,
from http://www. ime.gob.mx/investigaciones/2006/estudios/migracion/
economic_impact_ hispanic_population_north_carolina.pdf
Moore, S. (1998). A fiscal portrait of the newest Americans. Retrieved
January 29, 2009, from http://eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/
content_storage_01/0000019b/80/17/4a/04.pdf
Ottavanio, G. I. P., & Peri, G. (2006). Rethinking the effects of immigration on
wages. Retrieved January 29, 2009, from http://creativeclass.com/rfcgdb/
articles/Peri and Ottavanio, Rethinking Immigrations Effect.pdf
Raphael, S., & Ronconi, L. (2007). The effects of labor market competition with
immigrants on the wages and employment of natives: What does existing
research tell us? Retrieved January 29, 2009, from http://www.irle.
berkeley.edu/cwed/ronconi/immigration_existing_research.pdf
Yearbook of Immigration Statistics: 2007. Retrieved January 29, 2009, from
http://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/statistics/publication/yearbook.shtm

Bilingual Research Journal, 31: 371–376, 2008
Copyright 2008 by the National Association for Bilingual Education
ISSN: 1523-5882 print/1523-5890 online
DOI: 10.1080/15235880802640870