Fact Check: Examining Crime Rates Among Undocumented Immigrants Versus U.S. Citizens

Immigration and crime rates have long been subjects of heated political debate in the United States, with conflicting claims about whether undocumented immigrants commit crimes at higher rates than American citizens. This issue has gained renewed attention in recent political campaigns and policy discussions.

Multiple research studies and data analyses from nonpartisan organizations have consistently found that undocumented immigrants are not more likely to commit crimes than native-born citizens. In fact, several studies suggest they may commit fewer crimes on average.

The Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, published research in 2019 analyzing Texas Department of Public Safety data. Their findings revealed that undocumented immigrants had 56% lower criminal conviction rates than native-born Americans. Legal immigrants showed even lower rates, with 85% fewer criminal convictions than U.S.-born citizens.

Similarly, a 2020 study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences examined data from Texas between 2012 and 2018. Researchers found that undocumented immigrants were half as likely to be arrested for violent crimes compared to U.S.-born citizens, and significantly less likely to be arrested for drug and property crimes.

“The data consistently show that areas with higher concentrations of undocumented immigrants have lower crime rates than comparable areas with lower concentrations,” explained Robert Adelman, a sociology professor at the University at Buffalo who has extensively studied this topic.

These findings align with broader immigration research. A 2018 review by the Cato Institute of criminal conviction data from 2015 in Texas showed that the criminal conviction rate for illegal immigrants was 50% below that of native-born Americans. Legal immigrants had an even lower conviction rate, at 66% below native-born citizens.

The Marshall Project, in collaboration with The New York Times, conducted a comprehensive analysis of metropolitan areas from 2007 to 2016. Their findings revealed that crime decreased or remained stable in areas where immigrant populations increased. Out of 200 metropolitan areas studied, 136 saw both falling crime and increasing immigrant populations during this period.

Experts point to several factors that might explain these patterns. Many immigrants come to the United States specifically for economic opportunities and to build better lives for their families. The risk of deportation and the potential consequences of criminal behavior create strong incentives for lawful conduct.

“There’s a self-selection factor at work here,” said Alex Nowrasteh, director of immigration studies at the Cato Institute. “People who choose to undertake the difficult journey of immigration, especially under challenging conditions, are often highly motivated to succeed and avoid trouble.”

Law enforcement officials in communities with significant immigrant populations often note that maintaining trust with these communities is crucial for effective policing. When immigrants fear reporting crimes due to concerns about deportation, overall public safety can suffer.

It’s important to note that crime statistics have limitations. Some crimes go unreported, and data collection methods vary across jurisdictions. However, the consistent pattern across multiple independent studies suggests the findings are reliable.

Critics sometimes point to specific high-profile crimes committed by undocumented immigrants. While these cases deserve attention, they don’t reflect broader statistical trends. Individual cases, while tragic, don’t provide an accurate picture of group behavior.

The debate around immigration and crime illustrates how empirical evidence can sometimes conflict with popular perception. Media coverage of crimes committed by immigrants may receive disproportionate attention, potentially creating an impression that doesn’t align with statistical reality.

As immigration continues to be a central policy issue in the United States, distinguishing between anecdotal evidence and systematic research remains crucial for informed public debate and policy development.