Immigration And Crime

The connection between crime and immigration has long been debated. Contrary to evidence, many Americans still believe that rising immigration leads to rising crime. Immigrants are thought to either be more criminal before they migrate and turn to a criminal lifestyle after settling in or become criminal through the process of immigration itself. Opposite of this, recent research findings show that immigration may actually contribute to a decrease of the overall crime rate. However, such theories are hard to support as immigrants are usually underrepresented in criminal statistics. Across the board, the correlation between immigrants and crime is unclear due to contrary information and the lack of sufficient data.
The debate between increased
immigration and increased crime dates back to more than 100 years. Many of these debates stem from outdated stereotypes that view immigrants as criminals, thus causing many to conclude that more immigrants mean more crime. In fact, such prejudice played more of a role in early 20th century immigration policy than existing scientific information for that time (Sellin, 1938). For example, the eugenics movement of the early 20th century caused many to believe that immigrants were biologically inferior to natives and, as a result, crime was bound to ensue (Walker, Spohn, & Delone, 2012). Although much of the biological work associated with the eugenics movement has been discredited and disproved, these ideas guided the immigration legislation in the 1920s (Sellin, 1938).
The early Chicago School also conducted extensive studies into the immigration experience. These studies led to the conclusion of three sociological theories that impact the crime-immigration connection: social disorganization theory, cultural theory, and strain theory (Cullen, Agnew, & Wilcox, 2014). According to the social disorganization theory, immigrants resided in areas that were characterized by poverty, heterogeneity, and a lack of collective community functions resulting in higher rates of crime than native communities (Cullen, Agnew, & Wilcox, 2014). Cultural theories argued that the difference in cultural norms between immigrants and natives weakened social ties and produced high levels of disorder resulting in high crime rates (Sellin, 1938). Finally, strain theories argued that because immigrants were expected to achieve the same goals accustomed to natives without the necessary means to do so, immigrants were more likely to commit criminal acts to achieve those goals (Cullen, Agnew, & Wilcox, 2014). Although these theories attempt to explain the immigration-crime relationship, they lack empirical function.
Current researchers have re-examined the link between immigration and crime, and have found many flaws. One examination of the data found that between 1904 and 1930, prison rates for immigrants remained steady while prison rates for native-born citizens sharply increased (Moehling & Peihl, 2009). In addition, the authors conducted another study that found that immigrants who arrived during the 1920s had lower incarceration rates than immigrants who arrived prior (Moehling & Peihl, 2011). Moreover, children of immigrants who were born in the United Sates have higher rates of incarceration than their foreign-born parents (Moehling & Peihl, 2011). Data such as this do not support the theoretical link between immigration and crime as proposed by previous studies.
The post-1965 era of the immigration-crime relationship is riddled with multiple studies that indicate that immigrants do not increase crime and may actually inhibit it in certain areas.
Research conducted by Lee, Martinez, and Rosenfeld in 2001 examined the relationship between immigrants and homicide rates in El Paso, Miami, and San Diego. Their research showed that the arrival of immigrants from 1985-1995 did not increase race-specific homicide rates (Lee, Martinez, & Rosenfeld, 2001). In another study, Robert Sampson and his colleagues found that an average male living in a high-risk, native-born neighborhood was 25 percent more likely to commit a violent criminal act than an average male living in a high-risk, immigrant neighborhood (Sampson, Morenoff, & Raudenbush, 2005). Finally, another study examining violent and property crime in about 140 metropolitan areas concluded that recent immigration did not inflate crime in metropolitan areas and had actually reduced homicide and theft rates, respectively (Reid, Weiss, Adelman, & Jaret,
2005).
Currently, the stigma towards immigrants and crime has taken more of a sociological view. Large increases in undocumented immigrant populations since the 1990s and a shift towards punitive criminal justice policies has resulted in intensified resentment towards immigrants (Walker, Spohn, & Delone, 2012). Many natives feel that immigrants should not be entitled to certain social benefits. As an effect of such attitudes, the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 increased the ability of the government to further restricted access to government benefits and to deport both criminals and undocumented immigrants (Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996). In addition, many natives view undocumented immigrants as criminals because entering the United States without proper documentation is often considered to be a criminal act. However, an undocumented immigrant entering the United States without proper documentation is a civil matter, not criminal. In Fong Yue Ting v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled that “the order of deportation is not punishment for a crime,” (Fong Yue Ting v. United States, 1893). Most immigrants who enter the United States have done so with a legal visa but have overstayed it. Those who have entered illegally and are caught are not always charged with a criminal offense. According to a summary of a National Academy of Science report, immigrants caught crossing the border illegally can be offered voluntary departure, can be formally removed through standard removal or accelerated removal, or can be charged with a criminal offense if they have an existing criminal record: a misdemeanor for criminal entry, and a felony for criminal reentry (Redburn, Reuter, & Majmundar, 2011). According to Redburn, Reuter, and Majmundar, 90 percent of immigrants up for deportation have been granted voluntary return (Redburn, Reuter, & Majmundar, 2011). Aside from being caught at the border, undocumented immigrants are found through police screenings during arrests or through screenings done in local jails or prisons. Many of these programs result in voluntary return or standard or accelerated removals (Redburn, Reuter, & Majmundar, 2011). Immigrants apprehended for less serious crimes are offered voluntary return at the discretion of the U.S. Customs and Border Patrol (Redburn, Reuter, & Majmundar, 2011). As previously stated, undocumented immigrants who are deported are not technically committing a crime. Because they are not citizens, they do not have access to the protections of criminal law, and are, instead, given administrative hearings. Such hearings are not in the favor of undocumented immigrants as they are not granted due process. After September 11, 2001, the PATRIOT Act and other policies raised the issue of criminalization and immigration to the national security level, giving federal and state jurisdiction increased power to surveil immigrants (Schriro, 2009). In addition, because the attack was committed by immigrants who were in the U.S. legally but had overstayed their visas, immigration and border control was linked to antiterrorist legislation. For instance, the National Security Entry-Exit Registration System (NSEERS) required male immigrants from 25 countries to register with the government (Rudolph, 2007). Although the 25 countries were removed from SNEERS registration in 2011, such policies and legislation encouraged the treatment of undocumented immigrants as criminals. To fully understand the connection between immigration and crime, more research is needed.
Studies that separate crime data into in specific subgroups and examine crime patterns are especially helpful, especially for ethnic groups that are the target for stereotyping (Lee & Martinez, 2000). A recent study using national and local level data found that incarceration rates among immigrants increased as the amount of time spent in the United States increased (Lee & Martinez, 2000). According to the study, although first-generation immigrants have lower incarceration rates, the incarceration rates for Latin American and Asian groups born in the United States is greater than the incarceration rate of non-Hispanic whites (Lee & Martinez, 2000). Studies conducted in such a way are necessary as they take into account many factors specific to different immigrant groups as opposed to grouping all immigrants groups into one racialized category (Lee & Martinez,
2000). Despite evidence and studies supporting the conclusion that immigrants do not increase crime rates, many natives still insist that more immigrants means more crime. The majority of these claims stem from outdated theories and stereotypical political rhetoric. In fact, studies show that immigrants do not increase crime rates and may even reduce crime rates in metropolitan areas. In addition, continued “Americanization” of immigrants and their children has shown to increase the likelihood of committing a crime. Considering many immigrants leave their native country to pursue a better life, it makes sense that they would not want to jeopardize their stay by participating in criminal acts.