The Gendered Effects of Local Immigration Enforcement: Latinas’ Social Isolation in Chicago, Houston, Los Angeles, and Phoenix

Abstract

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.

Legal Violence, Health, and Access to Care: Latina Immigrants in Rural and Urban Kansas

“…First, today’s ramped-up interior and localized enforcement of policies in place for three decades (Abrego et al 2017) create a perpetual state of fear of deportability (De Genova 2002), family separation, and contact with social service institutions. Fear produces chronic stress, harming Latina immigrants’ health, constraining their mobility, and limiting their presence in public spaces and contact with health care providers, thus, undermining women’s previously held roles as bridges between their families and institutions (Simmons et al 2020). Second, public health, immigration policies, and state-level laws that formally exclude undocumented immigrants and their family members from health insurance make health care inaccessible for immigrants in vulnerable legal statuses.…”

“…In 2014, the Priority Enforcement Program (PEP) replaced SCP to focus on detaining and deporting immigrants who had committed serious crimes; thus, PEP decreased interior apprehensions. The 287(g) was phased out due to concerns with racial profiling, but the Trump administration's 2017 Executive Order 13768 resurrected it, broadening deportability criteria to any person deemed undocumented (Simmons et al 2020). Thus, in 2017, internal 1 removals increased 27% from the previous year, accounting for 36% of all removals in 2017 (U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement [ICE] 2017) and an additional 17% in 2018 (U.S. ICE 2018).…”

“…2 This limits women's interactions with formal institutions and participation in public spaces (Schmalzbauer 2014) and their connections to organizations that provide assistance for immediate needs, such as police protection from abuse and access to health care (Reina and Lohman 2015). Thus, today's enforcement regime is reconfiguring immigrant women's roles as conduits to institutions (Simmons et al 2020).…”

“…In 2014, the Priority Enforcement Program (PEP) replaced SCP to focus on detaining and deporting immigrants who had committed serious crimes; thus, PEP decreased interior apprehensions. The 287(g) was phased out due to concerns with racial profiling, but the Trump administration's 2017 Executive Order 13768 resurrected it, broadening deportability criteria to any person deemed undocumented (Simmons et al 2020 (Davis 2018) and in the interior of the country (Dickerson and Kanno-Youngs 2020), such as "zero-tolerance" policies, bans on migrants from Muslim-majority countries, restrictions to refugee and asylum eligibility, the threat of ending some temporary statuses, and the creation of denaturalization agencies (Pierce 2019). In 2019, the New Public Charge Rule changed new immigrants' admissibility requirements and deportability rules for established noncitizens (U.S. Citizen and Immigration Services 2019).…”

“…We first describe the legal violence lens as it relates to amplified immigration enforcement and the consequences for immigrants’ health. Following, we focus on the role of place in shaping health outcomes and summarize Latina immigrants’ thinning roles as “community builders,” which we argue is a consequence of an amplified interior enforcement regime (see also Simmons, Menjívar, and Valdez 2020). A section on data and methods follows, and then we discuss health care in Kansas.…”