Whether attributable to media coverage or political rhetoric flaming the distrust of Middle Easterners or those who shared the same skin coloring and facial features, whole ethnicities were condemned for the actions of only a faction.

Racial and religious intolerance were justified in the name of the victims of 9/11. By the time the nation and the world came to their senses, prejudices and discrimination towards these ethnic and religious groups had become so ingrained in the mindset of people that it is hard to remember what life was like when we looked upon each other as only fellow travelers on life's journey rather than potential threats to our personal safety.

Before the 9/11 terrorist attacks, it seemed likely a path to legal status was in the cards for Mexicans in the country illegally. Just five years earlier, in 1997, the Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act gave a way for some illegal immigrants from Nicaragua, Cuba, El Salvador, and Guatemala to gain permanent resident status. In 1998, the Haitian Refugee Immigration Fairness Act did the same for Haitians. Opponents, who called these actions "amnesties," were already working to build opposition, but for those advocating a pathway to citizenship, hopes were high.

For Roy Beck, president of Numbers USA, which advocates limiting immigration overall, this new focus on enforcement was a relief since it changed a growing pattern of legalization legislation. "There have been zero amnesties passed since 9/11," he says. "It may be that 9/11 did change the environment so that it became harder for Congress to continue to pass an amnesty every couple years."

The trajectory of immigration legislation and policy took a complete turn, as an August report from the Migration Policy Institute details. Programs to allow local law enforcement officials to cooperate with federal immigration agents meant immigration policy tightened significantly, and attempts at comprehensive immigration reform under both Presidents Bush and Obama-which usually included enforcement, a guest worker program, and a path to legalization for undocumented immigrants-have failed. The attacks "derailed anything and everything that wasn't crackdown enforcement," says Rick Swartz, an expert in immigration policy who helped construct and advocate pro-immigrant legislation since the 1980s and founded the National Immigration Forum. The goal after the attacks, he says, was "round people up; prevent this from happening again; prepare for new attacks."

Out of the widespread attention to immigration enforcement after 9/11, a wide array of citizen activist groups sprouted, fighting for stricter immigration policies-like the Coalition for a Secure Driver's License-or border security-like the Minuteman Project. Others grew. For example, Beck's Numbers USA was founded in 1996 and had about 4,000 members before 9/11. That next year, Beck says, it nearly tripled its membership. The group now has over a million members.

For those who applaud stricter immigration policy, the heightened public sentiment and attention was positive. Healthy, even. "What 9/11 really shocked Americans into realizing is that some [immigrants]-and it doesn't take very many-are terrorists," says Beck. "They know that immigrants are mixed bag, just like all people."