Contrary to popular perceptions that immigration increases crime, the research literature demonstrates that immigration generally serves a protective function, reducing crime. This review takes as its starting point the contradiction between the rhetoric and the reality of immigration and crime in the United States. We begin by exploring the conditions under which immigration reduces crime and those under which it has less or no effect, with particular attention to traditional and new destination sites. We then demonstrate how the moral panic about immigration has contributed to unprecedented levels of new legislation and intensified enforcement practices. These new laws and policies, we suggest, are making immigrants and their communities less safe. We consider some of the ways in which immigrants have become more vulnerable and how that vulnerability is patterned and nuanced. We close by examining recent research in other parts of the world, finding some similarities but also differences in the relationships among immigration, crime, and victimization.

Although prior work has substantiated the role of external attributes in juvenile court decision making, no study to date has examined how family situational factors as well as maternal and paternal incarceration affect juvenile court officials' responses to troubled youth. Using quantitative and qualitative juvenile court data from a large urban county in the southwest, this study draws on attribution theory to examine how family structure, perceptions of family dysfunction, and parental incarceration influence out‐of‐home placement decisions. Findings reveal that juvenile court officials' perceptions of good and bad families inform their decision making. This study emphasizes the need to unravel the intricate effects of maternal and paternal incarceration and officials' attributions about families and family structure on juvenile court decision making.

Determination of whether a youth is compliant with the conditions of probation and, if not, how to ensure future compliance is an important intermediate stage in juvenile court decision making. Yet, little is known about the conditions under which noncompliance is or is not documented in the youth's file, what happens to noncompliant youth, and whether documentation of noncompliance is influenced by race and class. Probation officers necessarily make recommendations based on incomplete knowledge, the very circumstances under which research has demonstrated that racial biases are most likely to surface. The authors analyze juvenile court data to examine whether and how documentation of noncompliance is affected by race, ethnicity, and class. Logistic regression demonstrates that black youth and youth from poorer neighborhoods are especially likely to have noncompliance documented. Content analysis of court social files clarifies further how race, class, family structure, and family circumstances affect officials' assessments of youth.

No abstract

Drawing on in-depth interviews with 30 homeless youth, this study depicts a unique aspect of homeless youth street culture-the formation of "street families." This article examines youth's motivations for creating street families, their organization and maintenance, and the role gender plays in adopting familial identities. Although many homeless adolescents come from dysfunctional families, street family members often recreate traditional family roles. Membership often mitigates the demands of street life, yet intragroup violence/victimization is common. The findings highlight the unique nature of street families and implications for research, policy, and practice, including the need for involving peers in intervention efforts.