Immigration Enforcement Policies and the Mental Health of US Citizens: Findings from a Comparative Analysis

Anxious Activists? Examining Immigration Policy Threat, Political Engagement, and Anxiety among College Students with Different Self/Parental Immigration Statuses

Restrictive immigration policies harm the mental health of undocumented immigrants and their U.S. citizen family members. As a sociopolitical stressor, threat to family due to immigration policy can heighten anxiety, yet it is unclear whether political engagement helps immigrant-origin students to cope. We used a cross-sectional survey of college students from immigrant families (N = 2,511) to investigate whether anxiety symptomatology was associated with perceived threat to family and if political engagement moderated this relationship. We stratified analyses by self/parental immigration statuses-undocumented students, U.S. citizens with undocumented parents, and U.S. citizens with lawfully present parents-to examine family members' legal vulnerability. Family threat was significantly associated with anxiety; higher levels of political engagement reduced the strength of this relationship. However, this moderation effect was significant only for U.S. citizens with lawfully present parents. These findings emphasize the importance of the family immigration context in shaping individuals' mental health outcomes.

Hitting closer to home: State policies' impacts on health by race and legal status

While the proliferation of inclusionary and exclusionary state policies has led to an increasingly heterogeneous patchwork of state climates, state policy and the climates they create have become increasingly important for health outcomes. We leverage the heterogeneity across state policy climates to test the relationship between state-level policies and health inequality across the US. We include 24 state policies related to public health and safety, immigration enforcement, integration, and healthcare to capture the state climate. Using the Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP), a nationally representative study of households in the U.S., we estimate multilevel regression models to assess the relationship between state policy climate and healthcare utilization. We further examine differential effects of the policy climate across various vulnerable groups, by examining differences by citizenship status and race. We find that more exclusionary policies may be detrimental to healthcare utilization for all residents regardless of race and legal status- but ultimately racial minorities and noncitizens see the greatest benefits from inclusive policy climates.

The intersection of immigration policy impacts and COVID-19 for Latinx young adults

For many Latinx young adults, COVID-19 has exposed exclusionary policies that heighten risk for contracting the virus and that leave them and their parents unprotected. This study has a dual purpose; first, to quantitatively examine immigration policy impacts of discrimination, isolation, threats to family, and vulnerability, and their association to economic consequences experienced by Latinx young adults in Central Texas during the initial months of the COVID-19 pandemic. Second, to qualitatively explore how policy impacts affected Latinx young adults during the pandemic, and the coping mechanisms they utilized to minimize these impacts. Quantitative results show that on average, Latinx young adults (N = 83) reported low discrimination and isolation but moderate threats to family and vulnerability, with rates of isolation and vulnerability higher for foreign-born than U.S.-born Latinx young adults. Perceived discrimination due to one's own or family immigration status was associated with economic hardship. Qualitative findings show that Latinx young adults (n = 21) experienced (a) precarious conditions that pose a threat of COVID-19 infection for Latinxs, (b) parental job loss due to vulnerable employment leads to deprivation, and (c) policies that disproportionally discriminate against the Latinx community and exclude them from vital services. Despite these challenges, participants also drew on resilience and expressed hope for the future. The article concludes with implications for policymakers and practitioners to provide protections and services to Latinx young adults and their family members.

'I like to protect my protector': How US-born Latinos safeguard the livelihood of their immigrant communities from immigration enforcement encounters

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.

Torturing environments and multiple injuries in Mexican migration detention

Mexico's role in the US-Central American migration regime is threefold: not only is it a country of origin, and a transit country, but also increasingly becoming a receiving country for migrants who flee from violence, insecurity and poverty. The Mexican state responds with detention enforcement. Clinical research usually puts emphasise on the negative impact of detention enforcement on the detainees' mental health. Yet, it often disregards the spatial configurations of detention centres and their socio-political context. This study aims to fill this gap by analysing how such factors create harmful environments that affect both the detainees' mental health and their social life in Mexico's migration detention centres. The study's mixed method approach builds on semi-structured interviews with a sample of N = 56 migrants of diverse nationalities and varying socioeconomic status of whom 22 were still detained while 34 had been released. The interviews include the Torturing Environment Scale (TES), a novel instrument for the analysis of detention environments, as well as clinical psychological measures of emotional distress. Additional n = 10 in-depth interviews with human rights advocates to explore the interconnections between the detention environments, their impact on mental health, and Mexican migration politics. Facultative counter-mappings of the detention centres complement the interviews. Without exception, all interviews of detainees underline that the manipulation of detention conditions creates torturing environments that cause harm to basic physiological and psychological needs. A comparison between detained vs. released interviewees revealed lasting feelings of fear and shame. The study emphasises that immigration detention immobilises migrants in a necropolitical limbo, which destroys hope as much as human integrity. It indicates that detention is part of deterrence politics, which perpetuates harm and inequality through detention and deportation. Highlighting structural human rights violations, the findings stress the need to review current migration policies.

Immigration policies as political determinants of alcohol and drug misuse among US-born Latinos

BACKGROUND

The role of immigration policies as political determinants of health among US-born Latinos is significantly understudied. Immigration policies can produce immigration-related stressors that have 'spill over' effects on the health behaviors of US-born Latinos. However, less is known about how immigration-related stressors relate to substance misuse among US-born Latinos.

METHODS

1,784 US-born Latinos were recruited via web-panels in September 2021 to complete an online questionnaire. Inclusion criteria included: (1) self-identifying as Latino; (2) born in the US; and (3) being 18 years of age or older. Participants were asked 14-items related to immigration-related stressors and past-year substance use behaviors. Dependent variables included past-year: heavy drinking, high intensity drinking, illicit drug use, prescription drug misuse, cannabis use, cocaine use, methamphetamine use, prescription sedative misuse, and prescription opioid misuse. Two separate multivariable logistic regression models were conducted for each outcome to investigate associations between (1) specific immigration-related stressors and substance misuse; and (2) experiencing greater (vs. fewer) number of immigration-related stressors and substance misuse.

RESULTS

On average, US-born Latinos reported experiencing 3 immigration-related stressors. In multivariable analyses, being fearful or worried about being detained for immigration reasons was associated with increased odds of engaging in heavy drinking, high intensity drinking, and illicit drug use. Having ever feared or worried about being potentially deported for immigration reasons and having ever witnessed or experienced an immigration raid was associated with high intensity drinking. Parental detentions and deportations in childhood were independently associated with high intensity drinking, illicit drug use, and prescription drug misuse. Notably, greater number of immigration-related stressor experiences increased the odds of substance misuse.

CONCLUSION

Punitive immigration and enforcement policies give rise to multiple stressors that may render US-born Latinos vulnerable to misusing substances as a way of coping. Policies and public health interventions aimed at preventing and treating substance misuse should consider how immigration policies impact the behaviors of US-born Latinos.

Deferred depression? Mediation analysis of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals and immigration enforcement among Undocumented Asian and Pacific Islander students

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.

Perceived vulnerability to immigration policies among postpartum Hispanic/Latina women in the MADRES pregnancy cohort before and during the COVID-19 pandemic

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Research suggests that perceived immigration policy vulnerability has important health implications. Coupled with the mental and physical stressors accompanying the postpartum period and a growing awareness of the discrimination and structural racism experienced by marginalized communities globally, the coronavirus disease 2019 period may have exacerbated stress among vulnerable populations, specifically postpartum Hispanic/Latina women. This study evaluated perceived immigration policy vulnerability (i.e. discrimination, social isolation, and family threats) in early postpartum Hispanic/Latina women in Los Angeles before and during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.

METHODS

The Perceived Immigration Policy Effects Scale (PIPES) was administered cross-sectionally at 1 month postpartum to 187 Hispanic/Latina women in the MADRES cohort. Respondents between September 2018 and March 2020 were classified as "pre-pandemic" (N = 128), between March 2020 and July 2020 as "early pandemic" (N = 38), and between August 2020 and November 2021 as "later pandemic" (N = 21). Average PIPES subscale scores were dichotomized into "higher" and "lower" groups (⩽median, >median) and logistic regression models were performed.

RESULTS

Approximately half of participants had incomes of <$50,000 (50.3%) and were Latin American born (54.6%). After adjusting for age, nativity, education, income, postpartum distress, and employment status, early pandemic respondents had 5.05 times the odds of a higher score on the perceived discrimination subscale (95% CI: 1.81, 14.11), 6.47 times the odds of a higher score on the social isolation subscale (95% CI: 2.23, 18.74), 2.66 times the odds of a higher score on the family threats subscale (95% CI: 0.97, 7.32), and 3.36 times the odds of a higher total score (95% CI: 1.19, 9.51) when compared to pre-pandemic respondents. There were no significant subscale score differences between later pandemic and pre-pandemic periods.

CONCLUSION

Higher perceived immigration policy vulnerability was reported among postpartum women during the early coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic versus pre-pandemic periods. This suggests greater social inequities during the early pandemic period.

Perceived structural vulnerabilities among detained noncitizen immigrants in Minnesota

Across several decades there has been an unprecedented increase in immigration enforcement including detention and deportation. Immigration detention profoundly impacts those experiencing detention and their family members. An emerging area of research has found that immigrants experience a number of challenges which constrain and limit their decisions, choices, and options for security and integration in the United States due to social, political and structural determinants. These determinants lead to greater structural vulnerabilities among immigrants. The purpose of the current study was to illuminate the perceived vulnerabilities of detained noncitizen immigrants as they are raised and described while attending case hearings at the Bloomington, Minnesota immigration court. Through conducting a thematic analysis of notes derived from third party immigration court observers, three areas of perceived vulnerability were identified. These perceived vulnerabilities include 1) migration and motivations to migrate, 2) structural vulnerabilities (e.g., discrimination, financial insecurity, social ties and family support, stable or fixed residence, English language proficiency, health and mental health) in the US, and 3) challenges in navigating immigration detention. These findings demonstrate that noncitizen immigrants who are undergoing immigration detention are experiencing multiple intersecting vulnerabilities which profoundly impact their lives. Collaborative efforts across sectors are needed to work towards comprehensive immigration reforms including both short-term and long-term solutions to address pressing issues for noncitizens undergoing immigration detention.

A Qualitative View of Migration-Related Stressors on the Mental Health of Latinx Americans in the Current Sociopolitical Climate of Hostility Towards Migrants

This qualitative study aimed to elucidate and contextualize which and how migration-related stressors may influence Latinx Americans' (i.e., US-born; US-citizens) mental health status, including substance misuse. In 2019, a community sample of 22 Latinx Americans were recruited for an in-depth qualitative interview. Eligibility criteria included: being an adult, self-identify as Latinx, report a migration-related stressor, and report at least one symptom of a mental health or substance use problem. Open-ended questions focused on the migrant experience, perceptions and impacts of immigration enforcement, and how these experiences related to their mental health. Using a migration as a social determinant framework, we identified several migration-related stressors at the structural- and social-level of environmental influence that were related to participants' mental health. Findings highlight how migration-related stressors at the structural- and social-level of influence create systematic uncertainty by inducing fear into the daily lives of Latinx Americans.

Africans Who Arrive in the United States before 20 Years of Age Maintain Both Cardiometabolic Health and Cultural Identity: Insight from the Africans in America Study

The overall consensus is that foreign-born adults who come to America age < 20 y achieve economic success but develop adverse behaviors (smoking and drinking) that lead to worse cardiometabolic health than immigrants who arrive age ≥ 20 y. Whether age of immigration affects the health of African-born Blacks living in America is unknown. Our goals were to examine cultural identity, behavior, and socioeconomic factors and determine if differences exist in the cardiometabolic health of Africans who immigrated to America before and after age 20 y. Of the 482 enrollees (age: 38 ± 1 (mean ± SE), range: 20–65 y) in the Africans in America cohort, 23% (111/482) arrived age < 20 y, and 77% (371/482) arrived age ≥ 20 y. Independent of francophone status or African region of origin, Africans who immigrated age < 20 y had similar or better cardiometabolic health than Africans who immigrated age ≥ 20 y. The majority of Africans who immigrated age < 20 y identified as African, had African-born spouses, exercised, did not adopt adverse health behaviors, and actualized early life migration advantages, such as an American university education. Due to maintenance of cultural identity and actualization of opportunities in America, cardiometabolic health may be protected in Africans who immigrate before age 20. In short, immigrant health research must be cognizant of the diversity within the foreign-born community and age of immigration.