skip to main content
US FlagAn official website of the United States government
dot gov icon
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
https lock icon
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Title: Comparing crime rates between undocumented immigrants, legal immigrants, and native-born US citizens in Texas
We make use of uniquely comprehensive arrest data from the Texas Department of Public Safety to compare the criminality of undocumented immigrants to legal immigrants and native-born US citizens between 2012 and 2018. We find that undocumented immigrants have substantially lower crime rates than native-born citizens and legal immigrants across a range of felony offenses. Relative to undocumented immigrants, US-born citizens are over 2 times more likely to be arrested for violent crimes, 2.5 times more likely to be arrested for drug crimes, and over 4 times more likely to be arrested for property crimes. In addition, the proportion of arrests involving undocumented immigrants in Texas was relatively stable or decreasing over this period. The differences between US-born citizens and undocumented immigrants are robust to using alternative estimates of the broader undocumented population, alternate classifications of those counted as “undocumented” at arrest and substituting misdemeanors or convictions as measures of crime.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
1849297
PAR ID:
10205836
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ;
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
ISSN:
0027-8424
Page Range / eLocation ID:
202014704
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. Miller, Jody. (Ed.)
    Until recently, national-level data on criminal victimization in the United States did not include information on immigrant or citizenship status of respondents. This data-infrastructure limitation has hindered scientific understanding of whether immigrants are more or less likely than native-born Americans to be criminally victimized and how victimization may vary among immigrants of different statuses. We address these issues in the present study by using new data from the 2017–2018 National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) to explore the association between citizenship status and victimization risk in a nationally representative sample of households and persons aged 12 years and older. The research is guided by a theoretical framing that integrates insights from studies of citizenship with the literature on immigration and crime, as well as with theories of victimization. We find that a person’s foreign-born status (but not their acquired U.S. citizenship) confers protection against victimization. We also find that the protective benefit associated with being foreign born does not extend to those with ambiguous citizenship status, who in our data exhibit attributes similar to the known characteristics of undocumented immigrants. We conclude by discussing the implications of our findings and the potential ways to extend the research. 
    more » « less
  2. Abstract Restrictive US immigration laws and law enforcement undermine immigrant health by generating fear and stress, disrupting families and communities, and eroding social and economic wellbeing. The inequality and stress created by immigration law and law enforcement may also generate disparities in health among immigrants with different legal statuses. However, existing research does not find consistent evidence of immigrant legal status disparities in health, possibly because it does not disaggregate immigrants by generation, defined by age at migration. Immigration and life course theory suggest that the health consequences of non-citizen status may be greater among 1.5-generation immigrants, who grew up in the same society that denies them formal membership, than among the 1st generation, who immigrated as adolescents or adults. In this study, we examine whether there are legal status disparities in health within and between the 1st generation and the 1.5 generation of 23,288 Latinx immigrant adults interviewed in the 2005–2017 waves of the California Health Interview Survey. We find evidence of legal status disparities in heart disease within the 1st generation and for high blood pressure and diabetes within the 1.5 generation. Non-citizens have higher rates of poor self-rated health and distress within both generations. Socioeconomic disadvantage and limited access to care largely account for the worse health of legally disadvantaged 1st- and 1.5-generation Latinx adults in California. 
    more » « less
  3. Abstract Based on longitudinal research conducted with 21 Mexican immigrants between 2018 and 2021, this article examines the challenges the COVID‐19 pandemic posed to undocumented immigrants in the United States attempting to provide care for aging parents in Mexico. As the United States excluded undocumented immigrants from pandemic support, the pandemic undermined their ability to provide health care for their parents even as the Mexican public health care system crumbled. Meanwhile, as the pandemic hastened their parents’ demise, it thwarted immigrants’ ability to time returns to see their parents before they died. While scholars have amply documented how spatial disparities exacerbated the impact of the pandemic among marginalized groups, few have examined the temporal disruptions caused by the pandemic. This article suggests that the pandemic provoked particular distress by desynchronizing the temporalities of family life across borders and preventing immigrants’ abilities to coordinate care for their parents in time. [COVID‐19, transnational families, eldercare, death, time] 
    more » « less
  4. Prior work has focused on the role of media in shaping public perceptions of immigrants and in the construction of social illegality. In this article, we examine how the undocumented 1.5 immigrant generation perceive, consume, and navigate media messaging about immigration—and particularly Latino immigrants—to understand the role of media in shaping their lived experiences. We analyze 50 in-depth and nine follow-up interviews with undocumented young adults in Florida collected between 2017 and 2021. Two major themes emerged: (1) how media information and misinformation invoke both legal and ethnoracial consciousness; and (2) how undocumented young immigrants deploy agentic strategies to resist negative and dehumanizing portrayals by rejecting media altogether, leveraging media to resist abuses, and embracing counter-narratives. Based on these findings, we discuss the usefulness of a double consciousness framework and argue for the use of “ethnoracial consciousness” in synergy with legal consciousness to more accurately describe experiences for this population. 
    more » « less
  5. Despite public concern over immigration enforcement, little attention has been given to transgender immigrants, who are disproportionately at risk for arrest and deportation. Organizations dedicated to protecting LGBT people’s rights and immigrant rights have been working to address this issue and shape policy decisions to better protect transgender immigrants in detention centers; however, research has not investigated how these organizations frame transgender immigrant detainees and their experience in detention to accomplish their goals. This current study uses a content analysis of public documents spanning 2009–2021 from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Transgender Law Center (TLC) to investigate how two legal advocacy organizations frame the issue of transgender immigrants within detention centers. The ACLU rarely discusses transgender immigrants and thus upholds cisnormativity. When they do discuss transgender immigrants, their transgender identity is referenced as a singular issue in isolation from other facets of their identity. The TLC, on the other hand, frames immigration detention for transgender immigrants as part of a larger web of oppression. Through a comparison of the ACLU and TLC, this study underscores the role of cisnormativity as a tool for racialized social control. Findings highlight the importance of a critical, intersectional approach to immigration advocacy and scholarship that challenges the cisnormative assumptions guiding the current immigration system. Implications for future research and service provision are discussed. 
    more » « less