Although national identity can operate as an exclusionary boundary defining differences between “us” and “them”, scholars argue that priming national identity can also improve attitudes between groups in conflict. Using a survey experiment, this paper assesses support for economic relief for small businesses in the aftermath of COVID-19 to test whether the benefits of a shared ingroup identity are extended to groups that are commonly perceived as less prototypically American. I test whether priming American national identity results in increased support for relief, comparing attitudes toward Mexican-American and Italian-American restaurants. To test the role of cultural assimilation in shaping attitudes, I also explore whether highly assimilated individuals are more likely to elicit support. Results indicate that priming a common in-group identity results in more support for redistribution toward Mexican and Italian-owned businesses for perceptions but not behavior. The positive effect of American identity is most pronounced among Republicans and is enough to close the partisan gap in redistribution attitudes. These results suggest the continued importance of national identity to promote inclusive attitudes, but indicate that it may have more sway among Republicans. Lastly, these results are a positive indication of improving attitudes toward less prototypical group members.

Despite acknowledging the importance of intersectional analysis, little work in political science considers the role of multiple identities and their impact on politics. Similarly, while Latinas/os/xs are considered to be a heterogeneous group in theory, more empirical work that seriously engages with the diversity of the group is needed. This paper seeks to unpack previously unexplored heterogeneity in the group by examining ethnic, class and gender identity politicization among Latinas/os. I explore how these identity measures are related to one another, both within and across identities. I also examine intragroup differences on the extent of identity politicization. Lastly, I explore how these three identity measures are related to public opinion. Results indicate consistency across these identity measures, suggesting that rather than being mutually exclusive, they can be reinforcing. When examining intragroup differences, there are more differences between subjective classes than between men and women. However, these identity politicization measures are related to preferences for some policies but not for others. 

This paper examines the gendered nature of social position for Latino and Latina immigrants rooted in both the sending and receiving contexts. Since their receiving context is complicated by their integration into the racial hierarchy, I draw on several measures to understand how they view their social position relative to both Whites and Blacks. Although the findings suggest that social position is gendered, this varies depending on the reference group. In addition, I find that social interactions are relevant for shaping Latinos’ and Latinas’ ideas about their social position across various dimensions, and that their impact depends on whether these interactions are equitable (neighbor or co-worker) or non-equitable (discrimination or supervisor). However, although assimilation theories suggest that greater socioeconomic attainment and acculturation should result in higher social position, this relationship holds more for women than for men. On the other hand, men and women’s perceived social position relative to their origin countries is relatively similar. 

Despite a growing recognition of the diversity of the Latine population and theoretical debates surrounding Latinidad, the scholarly push to treat Latine politics as a collective enterprise has de-prioritized the study of its numerous subgroups. U.S. Colombians--the largest Latine subgroup emerging from South America--have until recently been mostly overlooked. In this project, we examine the political behavior of U.S. Colombians across migration cohorts and among those with different parental heritage (one or two Colombian parents), which are two key dimensions that have been underexplored in Latine politics. We also compare U.S. Colombians to other Latine national origin groups. To explore these questions, we use repeated cross-sectional data from the Current Population Survey (CPS) from 1994 to 2020. By exploring the political behavior of U.S. Colombians, we shed light on the unique characteristics of this diverse community, both within the group and in comparison to other Latine groups.