Search

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) issues detainer requests to local law enforcement agencies to hold detainees suspected of being undocumented immigrants until they can be transferred into ICE custody. We examined the association between area-level detainer requests and self-rated health among Latine adults. We linked health data from Latine adults included in the 2017-2020 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (n = 69,386) to detainer requests per 1,000 non-citizens in core-based statistical areas, (n = 152 across 49 states). We fit logistic regression models of self-rated fair/poor health on detainer requests, adjusted for individual- and area-level confounders. In adjusted analyses, we found that Latine adults living in areas with the highest quartile of requests had 24% higher odds of fair/poor health (OR 1.24, 95% CI = 1.05,1.47) relative to those in the lowest quartile. Local law enforcement agencies should limit cooperation with federal immigrant agencies to protect the health of Latine communities., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: The immigration enforcement system has significant effects on the health of immigrants, their families, and society. Exposure to the immigration enforcement system is linked to adverse mental health outcomes, which may have been exacerbated by sustained immigration enforcement activities during the COVID-19 pandemic., Objectives: This study was conducted to investigate the association between exposure to immigration enforcement and the mental health of undocumented young adults in California during the COVID-19 pandemic., Methods: Data are from the COVID-19 BRAVE (Building Community Raising All Immigrant Voices for Health Equity) Study, a community-engaged cross-sectional survey of the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on undocumented immigrants in California. A total of 366 undocumented immigrants between 18 and 39 years of age completed the online survey, which was conducted between September 2020 and February 2021. Multivariable logistic regression models were fit to examine the association between immigration enforcement exposure and depression., Results: Almost all participants (91.4%) disclosed exposure to the immigration enforcement system, with most reporting an average of 3.52 (SD=2.06) experiences. Multivariate analyses revealed that an increase in the immigration enforcement exposure score was significantly associated with higher odds of depression (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]=1.24; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.10, 1.40), and women were 92% more likely to report depression than were men (aOR=1.92; 95% CI: 1.12, 3.31). Those who reported deportation fears were significantly more likely to be depressed (aOR=1.24; 95% CI: 1.10, 1.40)., Conclusions: Researchers should consider the mental health implications of a punitive immigration enforcement system, and policymakers should examine the impacts of immigration policies on local communities., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest: No conflicts of interest reported by authors.

Background: A growing literature has documented the social, economic, and health impacts of exclusionary immigration and immigrant policies in the early 21st century for Latiné communities in the US, pointing to immigration and immigrant policies as forms of structural racism that affect individual, family, and community health and well-being. Furthermore, the past decade has seen an increase in bi-partisan exclusionary immigration and immigrant policies. Immigration enforcement has been a major topic during the 2024 Presidential election cycle, portending an augmentation of exclusionary policies towards immigrants. Within this context, scholars have called for research that highlights the ways in which Latiné communities navigate exclusionary immigration and immigrant policies, and implications for health. This study examines ways in which Mexican-origin women in a midwestern northern border community navigate restrictive immigration and immigrant policies to access health-promoting resources and care for their well-being., Methods: We conducted a grounded theory analysis drawing on interviews with 48 Mexican-origin women in Detroit, Michigan, who identified as being in the first, 1.5, or second immigrant generation. Interviews were conducted in English or Spanish, depending on participants' preferences, and were conducted at community-based organizations or other locations convenient to participants in 2013-2014., Results: Women reported encountering an interconnected web of institutional processes that used racializing markers to infer legal status and eligibility to access health-promoting resources. Our findings highlight women's use of both individual and collective action to navigate exclusionary policies and processes, working to: (1) maintain access to health-promoting resources; (2) limit labeling and stigmatization; and (3) mitigate adverse impacts of immigrant policing on health and well-being. The strategies women engaged were shaped by both the immigration processes and structures they confronted, and the resources to which they had access to within their social network., Conclusions: Our findings suggest a complex interplay of immigration-related policies and processes, social networks, and health-relevant resources. They highlight the importance of inclusive policies to promote health for immigrant communities. These findings illuminate women's agency in the context of structural violence facing immigrant women and are particularly salient in the face of anti-immigrant rhetoric and exclusionary immigration and immigrant policies., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

This paper examines the relationship between immigration enforcement and institutionalization rates of the elderly. Exploiting the staggered implementation of the Secure Communities (SC) immigration enforcement program across U.S. counties from 2008 through 2014, we show that SC led to a 0.26 percentage points (6.8 percent) increase in the likelihood that Americans aged 65 and above live in an institution. Supportive of supply shocks in the household services market as a central mechanism, we find that the elderly who are most likely to purchase domestic worker services are also the most likely to move into nursing homes following the implementation of SC. Additionally, we find suggestive evidence of significant reductions in the work hours of housekeepers, personal care aides, and home health workers hinting at the critical role of negative supply shocks in occupations that facilitate aging in community., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

This paper studies the effects of Secure Communities (SC), a wide-ranging immigration enforcement program, on infant health outcomes in the United States. Using administrative birth certificate data together with event study and triple-differences designs, I find that SC increases the incidence of very low birth weight by 21% for infants of foreign-born Hispanic mothers, who were most likely to be affected by immigration enforcement. There is suggestive evidence that the results are consistent with (i) changes in maternal stress induced by deportation fear and (ii) inadequate prenatal nutrition. A back-of-the-envelope calculation suggests that this unintended social cost of immigration enforcement ranges from $872 million to $1.59 billion annually., (© 2023 The Authors. Health Economics published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Latino immigrant families in the United States were disproportionately affected by intensified interior immigration enforcement under the Trump administration. US-citizen children are victimized by policies targeting their immigrant parents; research is sparse regarding how these polices affect children who experience parental deportation and children who are at risk for parental deportation. Additionally, anti-immigrant rhetoric can result in increased discrimination that also threatens children's psychological health. This qualitative study (N = 22) explores children's lived experiences of discrimination, parental deportation or threat of parental deportation, and perceived impacts on mental health. Interviews conducted from 2019 to 2020 revealed that children who are directly affected by or at risk for parental deportation experience detrimental impacts to their psychological well-being. Children experience discrimination as Latinos and children of immigrants, which is also detrimental to their mental/emotional health. Incorporating children's perspectives is critical to informing public health interventions. Findings demonstrate the need for family-friendly immigration reform., (© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited 2023, Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.)

In response to the intensification of immigration enforcement in the interior of the USA, some school districts have implemented 'safe-zone' policies to protect students' academic progression and well-being. Using primary data from a sample of US-born children of unauthorized migrants, we document the detrimental effect of stricter immigration enforcement on children's educational outcomes and the benefits of safe-zone policies. Our analyses show that restricting immigration authorities' access to schools and providing counseling on immigration-related issues are crucial policy components in strengthening children's focus, effort, expectations, parental involvement, and relationships. These findings highlight the damaging impact of immigration enforcement on US-citizen children in mixed-status households and advance our understanding of the role of local policies in mitigating these effects., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Using a qualitative phenomenological design, the objective of this study was to explore in-depth how US-born Latinos provide social support to their immigrant counterparts during a time of heightened anti-immigrant rhetoric. A sample of 22 US-born Latino adult was recruited in 2019 for qualitative interviews, following a period of intense immigration raids. Eligible participants were adults who reported experiencing an immigration-related stressor and screened positive for a mental health concern or substance misuse. Open-ended questions focused on topics of immigration and health. Using a thematic analysis approach, interview transcripts were coded to identify common themes within the domains of social support: instrumental; informational; emotional; and appraisal. We found that US-born Latinos provide diverse forms of social support to immigrants with the intention of protecting them from immigration enforcement encounters (e.g. deportation), thereby safeguarding the livelihoods of their communities. US-born Latinos are integral pillars of support and resiliency for immigrant communities, and the domains identified within this study suggest important implications for immigrant health., (© 2022 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: There are concerns about the representation of vulnerable and underrepresented racial-ethnic minorities in biomedical and public health research, particularly when the research requires the collection of biospecimens. The current paper reports on the acceptability, feasibility, and ethics of saliva collection in a study examining the relationship between chronic stressors among mostly mixed-status, Latinx families (N = 30) during high immigration enforcement., Methods: Data for this study included anthropometric measures and salivary biospecimens from each family member (N = 110) and a household survey. Data for this analysis are from ethnographic field notes, which were analyzed using a bricolage of critical ethnography and case study analysis techniques., Results: We discuss the feasibility, aversions, acceptability, and ethical implications of integrating salivary biomarkers with Mexican-origin mixed-status families living in an area with restrictive immigration enforcement policies. We present the recruitment and data collection strategies used by the research team to gain participants' trust, retain families, and maintain confidentiality., Conclusion: We recommend that researchers who obtain biospecimens from Latinx, Mexican-origin, and/or immigrant populations answer the participants' questions honestly and without fear that they will not understand the science to obtain voluntary assent and consent. We recommend that researchers be knowledgeable of the sociopolitical context that the Latinx, immigrant, and in particular, mixed-status families inhabit so that they are prepared to provide informational resources. Finally, we think it is imperative that the study team in the field be bilingual, multicultural Latinx persons who identify with the community., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: Undocumented immigrants are expected to face increased risks related to COVID-19 due to marginalizing restrictive immigration policies. However, few studies have assessed the prevalence of direct encounters with the immigration enforcement system among the undocumented and its impacts on their COVID-related health behaviors and outcomes. In this study, we quantify undocumented immigrants' lifetime exposure to various immigration enforcement tactics and their association with delays in COVID-19 testing and healthcare behaviors., Methods: This cross-sectional study included a non-random sample of 326 Asian and Latinx undocumented immigrants in California from September 2020 to February 2021. The primary exposure was immigration enforcement encounter scores ranging from 0-9, assessed through self-reports of direct experiences with the immigration system, immigration officials, and law enforcement. The main outcomes were positive test for COVID-19, had or suspected having COVID-19, and delayed or avoided testing and/or treatment for COVID-19 due to immigration status. We used multivariable logistic regression models to examine the association between the primary exposure and outcomes of interest., Results: Among 326 participants, 7% had received a positive COVID-19 test result, while 43% reported having or suspected having COVID-19. Almost 13% delayed or avoided COVID-19 testing and/or treatment because of their immigration status. Overall, an increase in immigration enforcement encounters was associated with higher odds of suspecting having had COVID-19 (aOR = 1.13; 95% CI: 1.01,1.26). Reporting an additional enforcement encounter was associated with higher odds of delaying or avoiding testing and/or treatment because of immigration status (aOR = 1.53, 95% CI: 1.26,1.86). Compared to their Latino counterparts, Asian respondents were more likely to report higher odds of delaying or avoiding testing and/or treatment (aOR = 3.13, 95% CI: 1.17,8.42). There were no significant associations between the enforcement score and testing positive for COVID-19. Additionally, while Latinxs were more likely to report immigration enforcement encounters than Asians, there were no differences in the effects of race on COVID-19 testing and healthcare behaviors in models with race as an interaction term (p < 0.05)., Conclusions: Immigration enforcement encounters compound barriers to COVID-19 testing and treatment for undocumented immigrants., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Education policy and the role of schools are a neglected part of the welfare state. Yet schools may be important sites for understanding how policy, work, and families intersect in immigrant households. Drawing on thirty interviews from seventeen households, this article highlights the experiences of families with young children during a time of increased national hostility toward immigrants. Given that immigrant families are often excluded from more traditional forms of social insurance, findings reveal the central role of fathers both inside and outside the home. Parental involvement, defined as parents' interactions with their children's education both inside and outside the home, was structured by English-dominant schooling environments. In Phoenix, parental involvement was uniquely shaped by a punitive immigration context at father's work and in children's schools. We discuss the implications of our findings on the intergenerational transmission of disadvantage and advance policy recommendations to support foreign- and U.S.-born children's educational success.

COVID-19 vaccines are effective in preventing COVID-19 infection, disease, and death. However, there is no data about vaccine intentions among the 10.7 million undocumented immigrants in the US. This study examined the associations between immigration enforcement exposure and vaccine intentions among undocumented immigrants in California. This community-engaged study partnered with immigrant organizations across California during the COVID-19 pandemic to recruit 366 study participants to an online survey regarding their attitudes about the COVID-19 vaccine and past exposure with the immigration enforcement system. Data collection occurred from September 2020 - February 2021 before the vaccine became available. Overall, 65% of study participants indicated that they would definitely get the vaccine were it to become available. In multivariable logistic regressions, an increase in immigration enforcement scores were associated with a 12% decrease in vaccine acceptance (aOR = 0.88, CI: 0.78-0.99). Additionally, undocumented women were 3.09 times more likely to report vaccine acceptance compared to undocumented men (CI: 1.79-5.35) and undocumented Asians were 57% less likely to report vaccine acceptance compared to undocumented Latinx immigrants (aOR = 0.43, CI: 0.21-0.88). Exposure to the immigration enforcement system may undermine public health efforts to prevent further transmission of COVID-19 by reducing acceptability of vaccines among immigrant populations., Competing Interests: The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest. This manuscript was made possible with the support of the UCLA Asian American Studies Center, California Asian Pacific Islander Legislative Caucus and the State of California, and University of California Office of the President Award Number R00RG2579., (© 2022 The Authors.)

This study examines how Mexican-origin women construct and navigate racialized identities in a postindustrial northern border community during a period of prolonged restrictive immigration and immigrant policies, and it considers mechanisms by which responses to racialization may shape health. This grounded theory analysis involves interviews with 48 Mexican-origin women in Detroit, Michigan, who identified as being in the first, 1.5, or second immigrant generation. In response to institutions and institutional agents using racializing markers to assess their legal status and policing access to health-promoting resources, women engaged in a range of strategies to resist being constructed as an "other." Women used the same racializing markers or symbols of (il)legality that had been used against them as a malleable set of resources to resist processes of racialization and to form, preserve, and affirm their identities. These responses include constructing an authorized immigrant identity, engaging in immigration advocacy, and resisting stigmatizing labels. These strategies may have different implications for health over time. Findings indicate the importance of addressing policies that promulgate or exacerbate racialization of Mexican-origin communities and other communities who experience growth through migration. Such policies include creating pathways to legalization and access to resources that have been invoked in racialization processes, such as state-issued driver's licenses., (Copyright © 2022 by Duke University Press.)

Objectives: Undocumented Asians and Pacific Islanders (UndocuAPI) comprise 25% of undocumented students. Yet few studies have examined UndocuAPI mental health in the context of the contradictory political environment which encompasses both inclusionary policies, such as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), and exclusionary policies, like immigration enforcement., Methods: Using cross-sectional survey data collected in 2019 from UndocuAPI college students and recent alumni in California (n = 174), we used multiple logistic regression to estimate the effect of DACA status on clinical levels of depressive symptoms. We tested whether immigration enforcement experiences mediated this relationship using the Karlson, Holm, and Breen (KHB) method., Results: Adjusted logistic regression results revealed that UndocuAPI with DACA had significantly lower odds of depression (OR = 0.32, 95% CI: 0.13-0.79). Out of five immigration enforcement factors, limited contact with friends and family (OR = 2.36, 95% CI: 1.08, 5.13) and fearing deportation most or all of the time (OR = 3.62, 95% CI: 1.15, 11.34) were associated with significantly higher odds of depression. However, we did not detect a statistically significant mediation effect of immigration enforcement using KHB decomposition., Conclusion: Findings suggest that the benefits of DACA protected UndocuAPI in California from depressive symptoms, even when accounting for immigration enforcement experiences. Because it was unclear whether immigration enforcement mediates DACA, future research should investigate the underlying mechanisms between immigration policies and mental health with larger samples. Practitioners should consider the short-term need for mental health support and legal services for UndocuAPI students as well as the long-term goal to decriminalize immigrant communities to advance racial health equity., Competing Interests: The authors have no conflicts of interest or competing interests to declare., (© 2021 Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

US immigration enforcement policy seeks to change the behaviors and views of not only individuals in the United States but also those of prospective migrants outside the United States. Yet we still know relatively little about the behavioral and attitudinal effects of US enforcement policy on the population abroad. This study uses a randomized experiment embedded in a nationally representative survey that was administered in El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and Mexico to analyze the effects of US deterrence policies on individuals' migration intentions and their attitudes toward the US immigration system. The two policies that the current study examines are immigration detention and nonjudicial removals. The survey results provide no evidence that a heightened awareness of these US immigration enforcement policies affects individuals' intentions to migrate to the United States. But heightened awareness about the widespread use of immigration detention in the United States does negatively impact individuals' assessments about the procedural and outcome fairness of the US immigration system. These findings suggest that immigration detention may foster delegitimating beliefs about the US legal system without producing the intended deterrent effect., Competing Interests: The author declares no competing interest.

Purpose: Immigration enforcement policies and negative rhetoric about immigrants harm the psychological well-being of Latinx youth in immigrant families, particularly those who are most vulnerable because of their own or their loved ones' legal status. According to the Integrative Model for the Study of Developmental Competencies among Minority Children, discrimination may be one pathway to explain how vulnerability to restrictive immigration policies affects Latinx youth mental health., Methods: We collected data from 306 Latinx high school students from immigrant families in Harris County, Texas, and Rhode Island to (1) determine the direct effect of immigration enforcement fear (a proxy for the social position of vulnerable legal status) on adolescents' anxiety; (2) explore the effect of immigration enforcement fear on anxiety through the pathway of perceived discrimination; and (3) test whether the different enforcement climates in the two study sites moderate these pathways. Total anxiety and subscales measuring separation, social, school, generalized, and somatic anxiety subtypes were analyzed., Results: Immigration enforcement fear was related to increased somatic and separation anxiety in both first- and second-generation Latinx adolescents. Perceived discrimination partially mediated the association between immigration enforcement fear and separation and somatic anxiety; data collection site did not moderate these effects., Conclusions: Immigration policies and rhetoric have psychological consequences. Although the adolescents in our study face multiple stressors, immigration enforcement fear may heighten their perception of discrimination, in turn, likely elevating their physiological and family separation anxiety., (Copyright © 2020 Society for Adolescent Health and Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The 2017 revitalization of the controversial Security Communities program, which requires local law enforcement to cooperate with federal immigration officials in the United States, has made it urgent to better understand such enforcement programs' effects on the well-being of Latinas/os, especially the foreign-born. Social isolation from increased immigration enforcement can have significant impacts on economic, social, and health outcomes among Latina/o immigrants and non-immigrants. This article analyzes the gendered impacts of different levels of increased local involvement in immigration enforcement on social isolation, using a survey of over 2000 Latinas/os in four large US cities, all considered to be traditional destinations. Unsurprisingly, respondents reported increased social isolation resulting from local law enforcement's involvement in immigration enforcement. In contrast to results from previous research, our analysis found that women and men were equally likely to feel socially isolated and that having children led to more social isolation for both women and men. Personal and vicarious experiences with immigration enforcement, as well as living in Phoenix and Houston - two urban areas with the strictest enforcement regimes - were strongly related to social isolation. Our results indicate that local authorities' increased involvement in immigration enforcement can lead to more social isolation for Latina immigrants, particularly those who have children, aligning their experiences with men's and, thus, undermining Latinas' previously recognized role as bridges between their families and social institutions and as community builders., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting Interests The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

The article examines the migration infrastructures and pathways through which migrants move into, through and out of irregular status in Japan and the UK and how these infrastructures uniquely shape their migrant experiences of irregularity at key stages of their migration projects. Our analysis brings together two bodies of migration scholarship, namely critical work on the social and legal production of illegality and the impact of legal violence on the lives of immigrants with precarious legal status, and on the role of migration infrastructures in shaping mobility pathways. Drawing upon in-depth qualitative interviews with irregular and precarious migrants in Japan and the UK collected over a ten-year period, this article develops a three-pronged analysis of the infrastructures of irregularity, focusing on infrastructures of entry, settlement and exit, casting a comparative light on the mechanisms that produce precarious and expendable migrant lives in relation to access to labour and labour conditions, access and quality of housing and law enforcement, and how migrants adapt, cope, resist or eventually are overpowered by them., Competing Interests: Competing interestsThe authors declare that they have no competing interests., (© The Author(s) 2021.)

This study investigates the impact of the enforcement of SB 1070, a stringent immigration law, on the mental health, health-risk behaviors, and academic performance of Hispanic adolescent residents in Arizona. Using the difference-in-differences method, this study finds that SB 1070 increases their probability of feeling sad and decreases their physical activeness. The impact of SB 1070 on sad feelings and level of physical activity could have serious repercussions while it lasts. In addition, obese male Hispanic adolescents are more likely than their female or non-obese counterparts to develop mental health problems and engage in health-risk behaviors attributable to the stringent immigration policy. This study's empirical evidence on adverse mental health repercussions for Hispanic adolescents of state-level immigration enforcement suggests the need to be careful in formulating and implementing immigration policies., (© 2020 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Immigration enforcement cooperation between final-destination and transit countries has increased in the last decades. I examine whether the Southern Border Plan, an immigration enforcement program implemented by the Mexican government in 2014, has curbed intentions of unauthorized migrants from El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras to migrate to the United States. I use the announcement of the Southern Border Plan to implement a difference-in-differences approach and compare the evolution of short-run intentions to engage in additional unauthorized crossings of Central American (treatment group) relative to Mexican deportees (comparison group). The findings suggest that increased enforcement in Mexico decreases the likelihood of attempting repeated unauthorized crossings.

Using interviews and ethnography started in 2016 in rural and urban Kansas, we examine the consequences of an amplified immigration enforcement combined with a local limited health care infrastructure that reproduce legal violence manifesting on Latina immigrants' health, access to care, and community participation. We highlight the conditions rooted in place that generate short- and long-term negative impacts for Latina immigrants' health. Fear and anxiety about the deportation of themselves and their family members make them ill and also generate apprehension about contacting medical institutions, driving, and spending time in public spaces. These circumstances coalesce in women's lives to block access to medical care and undermine women's roles in their communities. Following gendered expectations, women turn to their informal networks to seek health care for their families. In the context that the enforcement regime has created, these ties can turn exploitative.

Background: Family separation due to the deportation of a migrant is pervasive, yet less is known about its potential impacts on the social, economic and mental well-being of families remaining in the United States. Methods: We conducted a mixed-methods study. In 2013, 303 Mexican male nationals completed an interviewer-administered questionnaire at a free clinic in Tijuana, Mexico. For this analysis, participants were: (1) ≥18 years; (2) seeking services; (3) Spanish or English speakers and (4) reported a U.S. deportation. Participants answered migration history items and open-ended questions regarding the impact of their deportation on U.S.-based family members. We present descriptive statistics and illustrative quotes for themes identified in the qualitative text data. Using a grounded-theory approach, we considered all data to develop a conceptual framework that others may use to study the consequences of family separation due to deportation. Results: Nearly two-thirds of participants reported living in the U.S. for 11+ years, a similar proportion reported 2+ deportations, and 31% reported being banned from re-entering the U.S. for 11+ years. More than one-half of participants were separated from their nuclear families (spouse/partner and/or children). Deportees who were separated from any family members reported that their families lost income for basic needs (rent/utilities: 50%, food: 44%, clothing: 39%, daycare: 16%, health insurance: 15%); school participation was also negatively impacted (31%). Qualitative data revealed that children ≤18 years remaining in the U.S. experienced mental health symptoms post-parental deportation (i.e., persistent crying, depression, sadness, anger, resentment). Deported fathers consistently expressed frustration at being unable to provide love, care, support, mentorship for their children. Based on our mixed-methods approach, we propose a framework to systematically study the consequences of family separation due to the deportation of fathers. Conclusion: Findings are consistent with the extant research. Binational interventions to support families that experience forced-separation are needed to mitigate short and long-term adverse mental health outcomes, especially among youth in the U.S., and other unfavorable family and household-level outcomes. Funding to understand the implications of maternal deportation and for longitudinal qualitative and quantitative research on migrant-focused interventions and related outcomes is needed., (Copyright © 2020 Ojeda, Magana, Burgos and Vargas-Ojeda.)

U.S. President Trump's administration has vowed to boost immigration enforcement to get rid of "bad hombres," or undocumented immigrants with criminal records. Using past data on the alleged detention motives for a representative sample of Mexican deportees, we evaluate how prior widespread and prioritized enforcement has fared in that regard. We find that while the early sweeping approach to enforcement raised deportees' propensity of being detained for minor offenses, the trend reversed with prioritized enforcement. These findings inform policy tactics that, aside from proving effective in prioritizing serious criminal offenses, can also lead to significant savings to taxpayers.

Public policies play a crucial role in shaping how immigrants adapt to life in the United States. Federal, state, and local laws and administrative practices impact immigrants' access to education, health insurance and medical care, cash assistance, food assistance, and other vital services. Additionally, immigration enforcement activities have substantial effects on immigrants' health and participation in public programs, as well as effects on immigrants' families. This review summarizes the growing literature on the consequences of public policies for immigrants' health. Some policies are inclusive and promote immigrants' adaptation to the United States, whereas other policies are exclusionary and restrict immigrants' access to public programs as well as educational and economic opportunities. We explore the strategies that researchers have employed to tease out these effects, the methodological challenges of undertaking such studies, their varying impacts on immigrant health, and steps that can be undertaken to improve the health of immigrants and their families.

Among Latinos in the United States, particularly in new settlement states, racial/ethnic discrimination, violence, and immigration enforcement contribute to health disparities. These types of experiences were explored among Latino men in North Carolina through quantitative assessment data ( n = 247). Qualitative in-depth interviews were also conducted with a subsample of Latino men who completed the assessment ( n = 20) to contextualize quantitative findings. Participants reported high rates of unfair treatment, discrimination or violence, and questioning about their immigration status. Having been questioned about one's immigration status was significantly associated with increased drug use (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 2.16; 95% confidence interval [CI] [1.07, 4.38]) and increased depressive symptoms (AOR = 2.87; 95% CI [1.07, 7.67]). Qualitative themes included: reports of frequent discrimination based on immigration status, race/ethnicity, and language; workplaces and police interactions as settings where reported discrimination is most common and challenging; frequent violent victimization; psychological consequences of experiences of discrimination and violence and concerns related to immigration enforcement for Latino men and their families; inter- and intra-community tensions; health-care services as safe spaces; use of coping strategies; and system-level approaches for reducing discrimination and violent victimization of Latinos. Findings point to the need to address underlying causes of discrimination and violence toward Latinos, particularly those related to immigration enforcement, to support health and well-being.

Sociologists recognize that immigration enforcement policies are forms of institutionalized racism that can produce adverse health effects in both undocumented and documented Latinos and Mexican-origin persons in the United States. Despite this important advancement, little research examines the relationship between fear of immigration enforcement and biobehavioral health in mixed-status Mexican-origin families. This study applies an embodiment of racism approach to examine how household fear of deportation (FOD) is related to differences in salivary proinflammatory cytokines (IL-1 β , IL-6, IL-8, and TNF α ) in healthy Mexican-origin families with at least one immigrant, living in Phoenix, AZ. Participants were 111 individuals (n=46 adults, 72% female; n=65 children, 49% female) from 30 low-income, mixed-status families. During a home visit, anthropometric measures and saliva were collected from each family member and a household survey was administered. Saliva was assayed for salivary IL-1 β , IL-6, IL-8, and TNF α . Random effects multilevel structural equation models estimated the relationship between household FOD and a salivary proinflammatory cytokine latent variable between families, while controlling for other chronic stressors (economic/occupational, immigration, parental, and family conflict). Household FOD ( β =0.68, p=0.04) and family conflict chronic stress ( β =1.96, p=0.03) were strongly related to elevated levels of proinflammatory cytokines between families. These results were consistent in non-mixed and mixed-status families. Future research is needed to characterize what aspects of living with an undocumented family member shape the physical health outcomes of persons with authorized status or US-citizenship.

The 2000s have witnessed an expansion of interior immigration enforcement in the United States. At the same time, the country has experienced a major demographic transformation, with the number of U.S. citizens living in mixed-status households-that is, households where at least one family member is an unauthorized migrant-reaching 16 million. U.S. citizens living in mixed-status households are personally connected to the struggles experienced by their unauthorized family members. For them, immigration policy is likely to shape their current and future voting behavior. Using data from the 2002-2014 Current Population Survey Voting and Registration Supplements, we examine whether intensified immigration enforcement has affected the political engagement of U.S. citizens living in mixed-status households. We find that immigration enforcement has chilled their electoral participation by lowering their propensity to register by 5 %; however, it has not visibly affected their voting propensity among those registered. Importantly, their lower voting registration likelihood does not seem to reflect indifference for community and public matters, given that it has been accompanied by greater involvement in civic forms of political participation, such as volunteering. Understanding how immigration policy affects the political participation of a fast-growing segment of the electorate is imperative because they will inevitably constitute a rapidly rising political force in future elections.

Background: Growing evidence indicates that immigration policy and enforcement adversely affect the well-being of Latino immigrants, but fewer studies examine 'spillover effects' on USA-born Latinos. Immigration enforcement is often diffuse, covert and difficult to measure. By contrast, the federal immigration raid in Postville, Iowa, in 2008 was, at the time, the largest single-site federal immigration raid in US history., Methods: We employed a quasi-experimental design, examining ethnicity-specific patterns in birth outcomes before and after the Postville raid. We analysed Iowa birth-certificate data to compare risk of term and preterm low birthweight (LBW), by ethnicity and nativity, in the 37 weeks following the raid to the same 37-week period the previous year ( n  =   52 344). We model risk of adverse birth outcomes using modified Poisson regression and model distribution of birthweight using quantile regression., Results: Infants born to Latina mothers had a 24% greater risk of LBW after the raid when compared with the same period 1 year earlier [risk ratio (95% confidence interval) = 1.24 (0.98, 1.57)]. No such change was observed among infants born to non-Latina White mothers. Increased risk of LBW was observed for USA-born and immigrant Latina mothers. The association between raid timing and LBW was stronger among term than preterm births. Changes in birthweight after the raid primarily reflected decreased birthweight below the 5th percentile of the distribution, not a shift in mean birthweight., Conclusions: Our findings highlight the implications of racialized stressors not only for the health of Latino immigrants, but also for USA-born co-ethnics., (© The Author 2017; all rights reserved. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the International Epidemiological Association)

Despite substantial public, political, and scholarly attention to the issue of immigration and crime, we know little about the criminological consequences of undocumented immigration. As a result, fundamental questions about whether undocumented immigration increases violent crime remain unanswered. In an attempt to address this gap, we combine newly developed estimates of the unauthorized population with multiple data sources to capture the criminal, socioeconomic, and demographic context of all 50 states and Washington, DC, from 1990 to 2014 to provide the first longitudinal analysis of the macro-level relationship between undocumented immigration and violence. The results from fixed-effects regression models reveal that undocumented immigration does not increase violence. Rather, the relationship between undocumented immigration and violent crime is generally negative, although not significant in all specifications. Using supplemental models of victimization data and instrumental variable methods, we find little evidence that these results are due to decreased reporting or selective migration to avoid crime. We consider the theoretical and policy implications of these findings against the backdrop of the dramatic increase in immigration enforcement in recent decades.

Medical anthropology has a vital role in identifying health-related impacts of policy. In the United States, increasingly harsh immigration policies have formed a multilayered immigrant policing regime comprising state and federal laws and local police practices, the effects of which demand ethnographic attention. In this article, I draw from ethnographic fieldwork in Atlanta, Georgia, to examine the biopolitics of immigrant policing. I underscore how immigrant policing directly impacts undocumented immigrants' health by producing a type of fear based governance that alters immigrants' health behaviors and sites for seeking health services. Ethnographic data further point to how immigrant policing sustains a need for an unequal, parallel medical system, reflecting broader social inequalities impacting vulnerable populations. Moreover, by focusing on immigrant policing, I demonstrate the analytical utility in examining the biopolitics of fear, which can reveal individual experiences and structural influents of health-related vulnerability.

Given the unprecedented increase in the flow of migrants from El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras to the United States, this article analyzes the impact of U.S. interior enforcement on parent-child separations among Central American deportees, along with its implications for deportees' intentions to remigrate to the United States. Using the EMIF sur survey data, we find that interior enforcement raises the likelihood of parent-child separations as well as the likelihood that parents forcedly separated from their young children report the intention to return to the United States, presumably without documents. By increasing parent-child separations, interior enforcement could prove counterproductive in deterring repetitive unauthorized crossings among Central American deportees.

As Congress priorities the immigration debate on increased border security, the fate of an estimated 11 million undocumented citizens remains uncertain. Stuck in between partisan politics and practical solutions are mixed-status families in which some members of the family are U.S. citizens while other members are in the country without proper authorization. This paper, examines the relationship between risk of deportation and Medicaid use drawing from a nationally sample of mothers from the Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing Survey. These data are then merged with data from the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services to create a contextual risk of deportation measure. Findings suggest that an increase in risk of deportation is associated with a decrease in Medicaid use. The implications of this work have tremendous impacts for health service providers and policy makers interested in preventing and reducing health disparities in complex family structures.