IMMIGRATIONNovel Study Maps Changes in U.S. Immigration Policy Landscape Since 9/11

In a comprehensive analysis of state and local sanctuary and anti-sanctuary policies, researchers have mapped the rapidly evolving legal immigration landscape in the US from 2000 to 2021. The dataset sheds light on trends in immigration legislation including ”punitive” preemption, state government tendencies to enact laws that are ideologically opposed to the current federal administration, and conservative states using preemption to control liberal localities. The findings of the study in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine, published by Elsevier, can be used to examine how changes in state and local immigration policies drive health outcomes among immigrants and their communities.

Immigrants account for over 14% of the US population. Under the Constitution, the federal government possesses power to regulate immigration, including entry, status allocation, and naturalization. Although states and localities lack authority to regulate immigration directly, both levels of government can enact policies directing law enforcement’s cooperation with federal immigration authorities.

Sanctuary and Anti-Sanctuary Policies
Pro-immigration policies that limit law enforcement’s cooperation with immigration agencies—typically US Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE)—are called “sanctuary policies.” These are enacted to reduce use of public resources for immigration enforcement, improve trust in law enforcement, and promote inclusion. Sanctuary jurisdictions are associated with having less crime and poverty, higher employment and income, and improved community trust.

In contrast, “anti-sanctuary policies” encourage or require law enforcement to cooperate with immigration authorities. Anti-sanctuary policies can negatively impact immigrants’ health by making immigrants feel unwelcome, increasing deportation risk, and are associated with increased rates of depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, chronic illness, and avoidance of safety net programs and healthcare.

“Immigration enforcement is a policy space that has rapidly evolved in the 21st century as more states and localities enacted such policies following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks,” explains lead author Caroline Kravitz, PhD(c), MPH, Department of Health Management and Policy, Dornsife School of Public Health, Drexel University. “We chose 2000 as our start year for local laws because many localities passed local immigration ordinances in the early 2000s in response to the terrorist attacks in New York City, and we wanted to capture these policies in our analysis.