ABSTRACT
Second, within the physical territory and at the border to the community of the State, there is another array of non-State actors, (oft en involuntarily) engaged in migration control, refi ning the construction of territorial noncitizenship. Some entities may be threatened with sanction if they do not participate in noncitizenship construction. Th is most commonly includes employers and landlords, but may also involve educators and health care professionals (Pham, 2008 ). In some jurisdictions, it may even include taxi drivers and religious leaders (e.g. see Clor 2014 ). Th ese individuals are coerced against entering into relationships with certain members of society because of their immigration status, or to be suspicious of those who may lack the status requirements. Th is may construct noncitizenship beyond the exclusions of noncitizenship explicitly requested by the State, since private actors, to avoid sanction, may interpret policy to be more exclusionary than is explicit in State policy. It may indeed cultivate a wider suspicion within particular contexts of persons of specifi c ethnic groups, for example, locally most commonly associated with irregular migrant status (Pham 2008 ). As such, this may even extend the construction of a form of noncitizenship also to members of the citizenry, ostensibly not subject to immigration policy.
