According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the multiracial population in the United States will more than triple by 2060, making it one of the fastest-growing demographic groups in the country. In fact, the number of people who identify as multiracial is growing three times faster than that of the population as a whole. Yet, political scientists still know relatively little about the political preferences of this increasingly important demographic group. Politics beyond Black and White is thus a timely intervention into the study of racial politics, forcing us to think about politics beyond singular racial identities, as the title of the book so aptly suggests.

In Part I, Lauren Davenport uses data from the U.S. Census to examine the creation and evolution of American racial categories over time. Although there is no standard definition of “multiracial,” Davenport categorizes people who have parents of two different races as “biracial,” focusing her research on the three largest biracial groups in the United States: people of black-white, Latino-white and Asian-white backgrounds. Davenport demonstrates that some racial boundaries are more rigid than others, with Latinos historically having more fluidity than Asian Americans and African Americans.

The rise in the multiracial population, however, is in part an artifact of the way in which questions about racial identification are asked, highlighting what we have known for quite some time: race is not biological, but rather a social construction, albeit one with important political and social consequences. Since 2000, the U.S. Census has given Americans the option to identify with more than one race, in contrast to previous iterations in which biracial Americans were forced to either choose a single race or identify as “other.” Davenport’s research reveals that, when given the option to choose multiple races, some biracial Americans exercise that option, whereas other biracial Americans choose to identify monoracially, most often with the racial ancestry of their minority parent. Relatively few biracial people identify as white: only 14 percent in her sample. Among black-white biracial Americans, the rate is even lower: just 5 percent identify as white. In short, the category “white” does not extend to biracial blacks as it does to biracial Asians and Latinos.

Part II of the book focuses on racial identity formation, helping us understand why some biracial Americans choose to identify as “biracial.” Davenport conducted in-depth interviews with 40 biracial college students living in the San Francisco Bay Area, providing rich evidence about how biracial Americans construct their own identities. Her interviews reveal that biracial Americans often incorporate or reject labels based on the type of interpersonal contact they have had and the settings in which they were socialized. California boasts one of the largest multiracial populations in the United States, which means that a multiracial identity may be more salient there than in other parts of the United States. If the interviews were conducted in a different context, say for example in the South where racial boundaries are traditionally more rigid, we may have seen a different process of biracial identity formation unfold. College students are also being socialized in institutions of higher education, where there may be more acceptance of a multiracial identity than outside the ivory tower. Perhaps future work might explore how the biracial identity formation process develops for biracial Americans who are not college educated or who are no longer enrolled in an institution of higher education.

Part III examines the demographic predictors of opting to identify as biracial, as well as the political consequences of this identification. Leveraging data from the Cooperative Institutional Research Program (CIRP) Freshman Survey, a survey of 400,000 first-year college students across three different years, she highlights the important role of gender and social class in the formation of biracial identity. Davenport finds that women are more likely than men to incorporate multiple races into their self-identification. This finding emerges across black-white, Asian-white, and Latino-white biracial Americans, although the effect is most pronounced among black-white biracial people. Biracial men are relatively more inclined to identify with their minority race, which Davenport argues can be attributed in part to the gendered nature of racial prejudice in the United States. Men of all racial backgrounds are more likely to say they experience discrimination, and biracial men are more conscious than biracial women of their status in society as people of color.

Social class also consistently predicts how biracial Americans identify. In Davenport’s sample, the biracial people who grew up in more affluent families or neighborhoods were more likely to identify as white and less likely to identify with their minority race. Davenport argues that higher incomes enable biracial Americans to display external markers of wealth, thus increasing their social mobility. Affluence, when coupled with biracial appearance, may lead some biracial Americans to be perceived as white. It is plausible, however, that biracial people who look more phenotypically white also have more access to social and economic resources. Myriad studies have shown that darker skin color, even among people of the same race, is associated with less favorable outcomes in employment, education, incarceration, and even marriage prospects. Unfortunately, the survey data did not include information on phenotype or skin color.

The political consequences of opting to identify as biracial are some of the most powerful findings of the book. How people see themselves racially is predictive of their political views, even after accounting for many other characteristics, such as their income, religion, and where they grew up. For example, Davenport’s results indicate that biracial people who identify as white only are less likely than those identifying as nonwhite to believe that racial discrimination is a major problem in the United States and are less inclined to support policies to alleviate racial inequities. In addition, biracial Americans who identify as white are less liberal on social issues, including same-sex marriage and gender equality. In contrast, biracial people who identify as multiracial or with their minority race only are more likely to perceive discrimination and social injustice and to endorse policies to remedy racial disparities. The survey analysis also reveals that identification as multiracial is associated with liberal opinions on social issues. Davenport argues that multiracial identification reflects a political attachment to marginalized groups, including racial minorities and members of the LGBT community.

One lingering question concerns the directionality of the relationship between biracial identification and public opinion. Is identifying as multiracial predictive of liberal policy positions? Or are people who are liberal on social issues more likely to identify as multiracial? Multiracial identification in and of itself is a political choice, one that was unavailable to earlier generations of biracial Americans. Take for example, the case of President Obama, born in 1961 to a black father from Kenya and a white mother from Kansas. Obama identified as black on the 2010 Census, although he could have opted to identify as biracial. Obama’s case may help underscore Davenport’s findings about the role of gender in racial identity formation, but it also suggests that there might be generational differences in how people of multiracial ancestry choose to identify. A sample of college freshmen limits what conclusions we can draw about the multiracial population more broadly, but it also highlights the dearth of data available on this politically consequential group. Davenport does a masterful job of illustrating the political consequences of biracial identification and the demographic predictors of this identity, despite the data challenges that she is forced to navigate.

In short, as the multiracial population grows, it is important not only to understand how this group of Americans constructs their identity but also to learn about the political consequences of this identity. Lauren Davenport tackles these topics carefully and with rigor. Politics beyond Black and White is a must read for anyone interested in learning about the social and political consequences of a group that is poised to play a vital role in the electoral politics of the nation.