Uncertainty About the Size of the Unauthorized Foreign-Born Population in the United States

One of the most common methods for estimating the U.S. unauthorized foreign-born population is the residual method. Over the last decade, residual estimates have typically fallen within a narrow range of 10.5 to 12 million. Yet it remains unclear how sensitive residual estimates are to their underlying assumptions. We examine the extent to which estimates may plausibly vary owing to uncertainties in their underlying assumptions about coverage error, emigration, and mortality. Findings show that most of the range in residual estimates derives from uncertainty about emigration rates among legal permanent residents, naturalized citizens, and humanitarian entrants (LNH); estimates are less sensitive to assumptions about mortality among the LNH foreign-born and coverage error for the unauthorized and LNH populations in U.S. Census Bureau surveys. Nevertheless, uncertainty in all three assumptions contributes to a range of estimates, whereby there is a 50% chance that the unauthorized foreign-born population falls between 9.1 and 12.2 million and a 95% chance that it falls between 7.0 and 15.7 million.

The Central U.S.–Mexico Borderlands during the 2020 Pandemic

This essay begins by setting the scene of the 2020 novel coronavirus virus (COVID- 19) pandemic in the central U.S.–Mexico borderlands. The essay then outlines the pre-pandemic situation, from 2016-2019, one characterized by larger numbers of migrant arrivals from Central America, harsh U.S. anti-refugee and anti-Mexican practices, and hardened border controls. The article then discusses pandemic-linked deaths and closures of the border to all but U.S. citizens and Legal Permanent Residents and to slightly diminished cargo traffic, rising again by July and numbers of COVID-19 deaths declining thereafter. Official U.S. border rhetoric has broadened to strengthen nationalist security rationales around health, while activists push back against harsh policy practices, creating an ongoing, dynamic tension in the borderlands.

What Is the Size and Legal Composition of the US Foreign-Born Population?

We assess government estimates of the size and legal composition of the US foreign-born population from 2007 to 2015. We examine annual Census Bureau estimates of the total number of foreign born (by citizenship) and annual Office of Immigration Statistics (OIS) estimates of the counts of the three noncitizen categories — legal permanent residents, legal temporary residents, and the unauthorized. Comparison of the annual Census estimates of the number of noncitizens with the estimates implied by the OIS estimates reveals that the OIS estimates are larger than the Census estimates by 3.4–4.7 million over the period. Besides documenting these discrepancies, we describe the data and methods used to produce the estimates, identify the possible sources of discrepancies, propose and implement an approach for reconciling the estimates, and contrast the reconciled estimates with the original estimates. Finally, we provide a foundation for improving estimates of the size of the four major categories of the foreign born, for example, by suggesting new methods to measure citizenship and to estimate such groups as legal permanent residents who become unauthorized. Because in most countries the four foreign-born subpopulations are constrained by distinctive rules, they each have different impacts on their host countries. Estimates of their size are critical for assessments of immigration policy, as differing constraints on employment and entitlement eligibility across these categories means that having accurate counts of their numbers is essential for assessing their economic and fiscal impacts in any country that hosts immigrants.

Differential Returns?: Neighborhood Attainment among Hispanic and Non–Hispanic White New Legal Permanent Residents

We use data from the New Immigrant Survey to examine patterns of residential attainment among Hispanic immigrants who recently became legal permanent residents (LPRs) relative to new LPR non–Hispanic white immigrants. We focus on whether these Hispanic and non–Hispanic white immigrants differ in their ability to transform human capital into residential advantage. Our results suggest that the answer depends on the neighborhood attribute in question. When predicting residence in tracts with relatively more non–Hispanic whites, the answer is yes, with evidence in support of the place stratification model of residential attainment. We find that non–Hispanic white immigrants have access to relatively whiter neighborhoods than their Hispanic immigrant counterparts, irrespective of differences in education levels. When assessing Hispanic immigrants’ ability to enter socioeconomically advantaged neighborhoods, however, the differences we observe are mostly accounted for by compositional differences in sociodemographic and acculturation factors. Taken together, our findings suggest that Hispanic immigrants are more similar to their white immigrant counterparts when it comes to converting higher education into higher income neighborhoods than into increased residential integration with whites; although their exposure to more socioeconomically advantaged neighborhoods at all levels of education remains lower than that of their white immigrant counterparts.

Multiplying Diversity: Family Unification and the Regional Origins of Late-Age US Immigrants

We use administrative data about new legal permanent residents to show how family unification chain migration changed both the age and regional origin of US immigrants. Between 1981 and 1995, every 100 initiating immigrants from Asia sponsored between 220 and 255 relatives, but from 1996 through 2000, each 100 initiating immigrants from Asia sponsored nearly 400 relatives, with one-in-four ages 50 and above. The family migration multiplier for Latin Americans was boosted by the legalization program: from 1996 to 2000, each of the 100 initiating migrants from Latin America sponsored between 420 and 531 family members, of which 18–21 percent were ages 50 and over.

The Citizen and the Criminal

New enforcement targets and deployment of more border patrol to Arizona-Sonora border communities has inadvertently involved agents more directly in local crime control. This is the flip side to the more familiar scenario of local police and sheriffs who carry out immigration enforcement. This chapter considers the overreach of enforcement priorities and what some refer to as “net widening” in predominantly Latino border communities where border residents, mostly Mexican American citizens and legal permanent residents, are routinely arrested, prosecuted, sentenced, and, in some cases, deported for violations of immigration law.

New Immigrating Racial and Ethnic Populations and “Trends Impacts” on State Vocational Rehabilitation Agencies

Current migration trends and projections indicate that the United States (U.S.) population continues to increase and diversify. Consequently, the numbers of new citizens and legalized permanent residents with disabilities from traditionally underserved racial and ethnic populations are expected to grow at an accelerated rate—roughly 1 million new citizens and legal permanent residents annually. These unceasing migration patterns raise concerns about the capacity of state vocational rehabilitation agencies (SVRAs) across the U.S. to effectively respond to this growing crisis. There exists a serious need to forecast these trends' impacts on SVRA systems capacity to serve persons with disabilities from these new and emerging racial and ethnic populations and communities. The purpose of this review was to synthesize the available peer reviewed literature and policy on multicultural migration trends and select SVRA systems forecast implications. A set of recommended approaches are presented that can be used to inform, guide, and forge future research directions.

The Spillover Consequences of an Enforcement-First U.S. Immigration Regime

In our introduction to this special issue, we describe how the immigration enforcement-first regime has consequences that extend beyond the supposed target population of undocumented immigrants and spill over to other groups, including legal permanent residents, U.S.-born Latinos/as, and other U.S.-born residents. The papers in this special issue address whether and how spillover effects exist and the form that they take. Often they include social, psychological, and in some cases, physical harm, and together they illustrate that directly or indirectly, U.S. policy’s emphasis on interior and external border enforcement affects all of us.