More Inclusive States, Less Poverty Among Immigrants? An Examination of Poverty, Citizenship Stratification, and State Immigrant Policies

The Intersection of State-Level Immigrant Policy Climates and Medicaid Expansion: an Examination Among Immigrants

States have broad discretion over the implementation of policies like Medicaid expansion and other policies that impact the well-being and integration of immigrants. While numerous studies document Medicaid expansion on immigrants' health insurance coverage and the role of state immigrant policy climates on immigrants' well-being, no research to date has studied whether the association between a state's Medicaid expansion on immigrants' health insurance coverage varies based on the inclusiveness or exclusiveness of a state's immigrant policy climate. We combine nationally representative data from the 2014-2018 American Community Survey (ACS) with state policy data and estimate multivariate regression models. The results reveal a state immigrant policy climate gradient whereby ACA Medicaid expansion on noncitizens is negative and most severe in exclusionary climates. This study highlights how state policies intersect as important structural forces that influence immigrant health and well-being.

State-Level Anti-Immigrant Sentiment and Policies and Health Risks in US Latino Children

BACKGROUND

Although systemic inequities, broadly defined, are associated with health disparities in adults, there is a dearth of research linking contextual measures of exclusionary policies or prejudicial attitudes to health impairments in children, particularly among Latino populations. In this study, we examined a composite measure of systemic inequities in relation to the cooccurrence of multiple health problems in Latino children in the United States.

METHODS

Participants included 17 855 Latino children aged 3 to 17 years from the National Survey of Children's Health (2016-2020). We measured state-level systemic inequities using a factor score that combined an index of exclusionary state policies toward immigrants and aggregated survey data on prejudicial attitudes toward immigrants and Latino individuals. Caregivers reported on 3 categories of child health problems: common health difficulties in the past year, current chronic physical health conditions, and current mental health conditions. For each category, we constructed a variable reflecting 0, 1, or 2 or more conditions.

RESULTS

In models adjusted for sociodemographic covariates, interpersonal discrimination, and state-level income inequality, systemic inequities were associated with 1.13 times the odds of a chronic physical health condition (95% confidence interval: 1.02-1.25) and 1.24 times the odds of 2 or more mental health conditions (95% confidence interval: 1.06-1.45).

CONCLUSIONS

Latino children residing in states with higher levels of systemic inequity are more likely to experience mental health or chronic physical health conditions relative to those in states with lower levels of systemic inequity.

Messaging inclusion with consequence: U.S. sanctuary cities and immigrant wellbeing

In the United States (U.S.), sanctuary cities have increasingly garnered public attention as places dedicated to increasing immigrant safety, inclusion, and health. These cities primarily rely on limiting local police cooperation with federal immigration enforcement to deter immigrant detention and deportation. However, sanctuary policies' inability to extend immigrants' legal rights and their reliance on police as ushers of sanctuary may complicate how these spaces attend to their stated goals. In this paper, we examine how organizational workers conceptualize sanctuary, safety, and immigrant health and wellbeing within sanctuary cities. We draw on interviews with organizational workers in two sanctuary cities: Boston, Massachusetts and Seattle, Washington collected between February and August 2018. Our findings reveal that immigrants continue to face structural barriers to housing, safe employment, education, and healthcare within sanctuary cities with consequences to wellbeing. Workers' definitions of safety draw on interconnected structural exclusion that prevent immigrants from accessing basic needs and fail to account for historically rooted forms of racism and nativism. Organizational workers identified tensions between messages of sanctuary and what local sanctuary policies offer in practice, providing insight into consequences of institutionalizing a grassroots social movement. As organizational workers negotiate these tensions, they must develop everyday sanctuary practices to extend immigrant inclusion, safety, health, and wellbeing.

Immigration and Immigrant Policies, Health, and Health Equity in the United States

Policy Points There is growing attention to the role of immigration and immigrant policies in shaping the health and well-being of immigrants of color. The early 21st century in the United States has seen several important achievements in inclusionary policies, practices, and ideologies toward immigrants, largely at subnational levels (e.g., states, counties, cities/towns). National policies or practices that are inclusionary toward immigrants are often at the discretion of the political parties in power. Early in the 21st century, the United States has implemented several exclusionary immigration and immigrant policies, contributing to record deportations and detentions and worsening inequities in the social drivers of health.

The Generative Mechanisms of Financial Strain and Financial Well-Being: A Critical Realist Analysis of Ideology and Difference

BACKGROUND

Rapid, strategic action is required to mitigate the negative and unequal impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on the financial well-being (FWB) of global populations. Personal financial strain (FS) worsened most significantly among systematically excluded groups. Targeted government- and community-led initiatives are needed to address these inequities. The purpose of this applied research was to identify what works for whom, under what conditions, and why in relation to community and government initiatives that promote personal and household FWB and/or address FS in high income economies.

METHODS

We employed a critical realist analysis to literature that reported on FWB/FS initiatives in high income countries. This included initiatives introduced in response to the pandemic as well as those that began prior to the pandemic. We included sources based on a rapid review. We coded academic, published literature (n=39) and practice-based (n=36) reports abductively to uncover generative mechanisms - ie, underlying, foundational factors related to community or government initiatives that either constrained and/or enabled FWB and FS.

RESULTS

We identified two generative mechanisms: (1) neoliberal ideology; and (2) social equity ideology. A third mechanism, social location (eg, characteristics of identity, location of residence), cut across the two ideologies and demonstrated for whom the initiatives worked (or did not) in what circumstances. Neoliberal ideology (ie, individual responsibility) dominated initiative designs, which limited the positive impact on FS. This was particularly true for people who occupied systematically excluded social locations (eg, low-income young mothers). Social equity-based initiatives were less common within the literature, yet mostly had a positive impact on FWB and produced equitable outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Equity-centric initiatives are required to improve FWB and reduce FS among systemically excluded and marginalized groups. These findings are of relevance now as nations strive for financial recovery in the face of the ongoing global pandemic.

State Immigration Policy Contexts and Racialized Legal Status Disparities in Health Care Utilization Among U.S. Agricultural Workers

Research links restrictive immigration policies to immigrant health and health care outcomes. Yet most studies in this area focus on the impact of single policies in particular years, with few assessing how broader state-level immigration policy contexts affect groups by nativity, race/ethnicity, and legal status. Linking data from the National Agricultural Workers Survey (2005-2012) with information on state immigration policies, we use an intersectional approach to examine the links between policy contexts and health care utilization by nativity, race/ethnicity, and legal status. We also assess the associations between two specific types of state immigration policies-those governing immigrant access to Medicaid and driver's licenses-and health care utilization disparities. We find that state-level immigration policy contexts are associated with health care utilization among U.S.-born and naturalized U.S. citizen non-White Latinx agricultural workers, who report lower levels of health care utilization and greater barriers to care-seeking in more restrictive policy contexts. By contrast, we find little evidence that state policies shaped health care utilization among undocumented workers. These findings advance understanding of the impact of "policies of exclusion" on the lives of marginalized groups and underscore the importance of racialized legal status in considering the links between sociopolitical contexts and health and health care disparities.

Latina/o Postsecondary Education: Trends in Racial/Ethnic Education Gaps and the Role of Citizenship in Access to Higher Education

Black-Latina/o and White-Latina/o bachelor's degree gaps persist in the United States despite substantial increases in Latina/o educational attainment since the late 1950s. The Latina/o population has grown rapidly in recent decades and currently comprises more than 20% of the U.S. population; however, barriers to citizenship have grown in tandem and have limited access to higher education. Using data from the U.S. Census (1950-2010) and the American Community Survey (2015-2017), we examine trends in Black-Latina/o and White-Latina/o college completion gaps and factors that may explain them. We find that college enrollment differences explain the majority of the bachelor's degree gaps. We then decompose enrollment gaps by differences in enrollment by citizenship and find that if the Latina/o population had the same citizenship rate as the White and Black populations, the Black-Latina/o enrollment gaps would effectively disappear and the White-Latina/o enrollment gaps would be reduced by up to 75%. Our findings indicate that the Latina/o population's relatively low college completion rates are partially explained by restricted access to citizenship. The high proportion of Latina/o noncitizens has also masked the considerable educational progress Latina/o citizens have made in recent decades.

Prevalence and risk factors of food insecurity among Californians during the COVID-19 pandemic: Disparities by immigration status and ethnicity

The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated socioeconomic disparities in food insecurity. Non-citizens, who do not qualify for most publicly-funded food assistance programs, may be most vulnerable to food insecurity during the pandemic. However, no study has examined heterogeneity in food insecurity by immigration status and ethnicity in the context of the pandemic. We analyzed the 2020 non-restricted California Health Interview Survey to examine disparities in food insecurity by ethnicity and immigration status (i.e., US-born, naturalized, non-citizen) among Asians and Latinxs (N = 19,514) compared to US-born Whites. Weighted multivariable logistic regression analyses assessed the association of immigration status and ethnicity with food insecurity. Decomposition analyses assessed the extent to which pandemic-related economic stressors, including experiencing reduced work hours or losing a job versus pre-pandemic socioeconomic position (SEP), accounted for disparities in food insecurity by ethnicity and immigration status. Regardless of immigration status, Latinxs were more likely to experience food insecurity than Whites. Based on the adjusted analyses, non-citizen, naturalized, and US-born Latinxs had a predicted probability of 12%, 11.4%, and 11.9% of experiencing food insecurity, respectively. In contrast, non-citizen Asians, but not US-born or naturalized Asians, reported greater food insecurity than Whites (12.5% vs. 8.2%). SEP accounted for 43% to 66% of the relationship between immigration status-ethnicity and food insecurity. The pandemic exacerbated economic hardship, but food insecurity was largely explained by long-standing SEP-related factors among Latinxs, regardless of immigration status, and non-citizen Asians. To address disparities in food insecurity, social assistance programs and COVID-19 economic relief should be extended to non-citizens.

Self-rated health of both US citizens and noncitizens is associated with state-level immigrant criminalization policies

Evidence shows that state-level restrictive immigrant policies are associated with health disparities between noncitizens and citizens. Most research has focused on Latinos and there is limited knowledge of the relationship between restrictive policies and citizenship status among other groups, particularly Asian and Pacific Islanders (API). We examined whether state-level criminalization policy contexts (e.g., law enforcement collaboration with immigration authorities, E-Verify employment authorization) were associated with self-rated health (SRH) by citizenship, with a focus on Latinos and APIs. We expected that criminalization policies would be associated with worse health for noncitizens and citizens, but with a more negative influence for noncitizens; and that this pattern would be the same for Latinos and APIs. We merged a state-level immigrant criminalization policy database with a multi-racial/ethnic sample from 2014 to 2015 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS, n = 70,335). We tested the association between SRH and the number of state-level criminalization policies and generated predicted probabilities of noncitizens and citizens reporting excellent health in states with the most and fewest criminalization policies for the full sample, Latino, and API respondents. In states with the most criminalization policies, all noncitizens had a higher and all US-born citizens had a lower probability of excellent health. In states with the fewest criminalization policies there were no differences by citizenship status. Findings provide new evidence that state-level immigrant policies may harm the health of US-born citizens. As immigrant policymaking at the state level continues, understanding the relationship between state-level immigrant policies and health inequities across citizenship statuses will continue to be critical to improving population health.

•

State policies that criminalize immigrants may harm the health of both noncitizens and citizens of different races/ethnicities.

•

More state immigrant criminalization policies are associated with health inequities between US citizens and noncitizens.

•

Immigrant criminalization policies are associated with worse self-reported health for US born citizens.

Geographic variation in COVID-19 vulnerability by legal immigration status in California: a prepandemic cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVE

To quantify COVID-19 vulnerabilities for Californian residents by their legal immigration status and place of residence.

DESIGN

Secondary data analysis of cross-sectional population-representative survey data.

DATA

All adult respondents in the restricted version of the California Health Interview Survey (2015-2020, n=128 528).

OUTCOME MEASURE

Relative Social Vulnerability Indices for COVID-19 by legal immigration status and census region across six domains: socioeconomic vulnerability; demography and disability; minority status and language barriers; high housing density; epidemiological risk; and access to care.

RESULTS

Undocumented immigrants living in Southern California's urban areas (Los Angeles, Orange, San Diego-Imperial) have exceptionally high vulnerabilities due to low socioeconomic status, high language barriers, high housing density and low access to care. San Joaquin Valley is home to vulnerable immigrant groups and a US-born population with the highest demographic and epidemiological risk for severe COVID-19.

CONCLUSION

Interventions to mitigate public health crises must explicitly consider immigrants' dual disadvantage from social vulnerability and exclusionary state and federal safety-net policies.

Challenging federal exclusion: Immigrant safety, health, and healthcare access in sanctuary cities

As the United States (U.S.) continues to prioritize federal immigration enforcement, subnational localities increasingly enact their own immigration policies. Cities limiting cooperation with federal immigration enforcement are commonly referred to as sanctuary cities, which aim to improve immigrant safety and wellbeing. Yet, little is known about how these cities accomplish this beyond immigration enforcement non-cooperation. We draw from qualitative interviews with 54 organizational workers in Seattle, Washington and Boston, Massachusetts. Our findings illuminate lingering challenges immigrants face within sanctuary cities and demonstrate how organizational workers mitigate the shortcomings of sanctuary policies to addressing broad definitions of safety and health by enacting their own sanctuary practices.

Social exclusion at the intersections of immigration, employment, and healthcare policy: A qualitative study of Mexican and Chinese immigrants in California

While immigrants in the US suffer poor access to healthcare in general, access within immigrant populations varies notably by legal status and employment. Intersections between immigration, employment, and healthcare policy have shaped immigrants' access or exclusion from healthcare; however, little research has examined how immigrants experience and navigate these intersections. Drawing on social exclusion theory and the theory of bounded agency, we aimed to investigate Mexican and Chinese immigrants' experiences of exclusion from healthcare as one key dimension of social exclusion-and how this was shaped by interactions with the institutions of immigration and employment. The examination of two ethnic immigrant groups who live under the same set of policies allows for a focus on the common impacts of policy. We selected Mexican and Chinese immigrants as the two largest subgroups in California's Latinx and Asian immigrant population. We use a policy lens to analyze qualitative data from the mixed-methods Research on Immigrant Health and State Policy (RIGHTS) Study, involving 60 in-depth interviews with Mexican and Chinese immigrants in California between August 2018-August 2019. We identified two primary themes: pathways of social exclusion and access, and strategies used to address social exclusion. Findings show that immigrants' exclusion from healthcare is fundamentally linked to legal status and employment, and that immigrants navigate difficult choices between opportunities for improved employment and changes in legal status. We argue that multiple categories of legal status affect immigrants' employment opportunities and social position, which, in turn, translates to stratified healthcare access. Our findings support the literature establishing legal status as a mechanism of social stratification but challenge legal-illegal binary paradigms.

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.

Selection, experience, and disadvantage: Examining sources of health inequalities among naturalized US citizens

Objectives

We integrated major theories in immigrant health and assimilation into a single analytical framework to quantify the degrees to which demographic composition, pathways to citizenship, and socioeconomic assimilation account for physical and mental health disparities between naturalized immigrants by region of origin.

Methods

Using the restricted data from the 2015–2016 California Health Interview Survey, we decomposed differences in physical and mental health into demographic factors, path to citizenship, and socioeconomic characteristics by region of origin using the Karlson, Holm, and Breen (KHB) method.

Results

Differences in socioeconomic status mediated most of the disparity in physical health between naturalized immigrants from different regions. Factors associated with major immigrant health theories—demographic composition, pathways to citizenship, and socioeconomic assimilation—did not mediate disparities in mental health.

Conclusion

This article argues that the study of health disparities among immigrants must simultaneously account for differences in demographic composition, immigration experience, and socioeconomic disadvantage. The findings also underscore the need for theory development that can better explain mental health disparities among immigrants.

•

Socioeconomic disadvantage accounted for poorer physical health among naturalized citizens who were born in Mexico.

•

Psychological distress is pervasive among naturalized citizens from Central and Latin America.

•

Differences in SES mediated the disparity in physical health between naturalized immigrants from different regions.

•

Demographic characteristics, time to citizenship, and SES did not mediate disparities in mental health.

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

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.

Association of Maternal Citizenship and State-Level Immigrant Policies With Health Insurance Coverage Among US-Born Latino Youths

IMPORTANCE

The association of state-level immigrant policies with uninsurance among Latino youths remains unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the association of state-level immigrant integration and criminalization policies with health insurance coverage among US-born Latino youths by maternal citizenship.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cross-sectional study analyzed secondary data from the American Community Survey, January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2018, for US-born Latino youths (age, ≤17 years) and their mothers (age, 18-64 years) as well as state-level indicators of immigrant integration and criminalization policies (in all 50 states and the District of Columbia).

EXPOSURES

Immigrant integration and criminalization policies.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The main outcome was maternal reports of youth uninsurance status at the time of the American Community Survey interview. Variation in youth uninsurance by maternal citizenship, state immigrant integration policy context, and state immigrant criminalization policy context were examined. All analyses were conducted with weighted survey data.

RESULTS

Of the 226 691 US-born Latino youths (115 431 [50.92%] male; mean [SD] age, 7.66 [4.92] years) included in the study, 36.64% (95% CI, 36.21%-36.92%) had noncitizen mothers. Overall, 7.09% (95% CI, 6.78%-7.41%) of noncitizen mothers reported that their youths were uninsured compared with 4.68% (95% CI, 4.49%-4.88%) of citizen mothers. Of uninsured youths who resided in states with a low level of immigrant integration policies, 9.10% (8.22%-10.06%) had noncitizen mothers and 4.75% (95% CI, 4.19%-5.37%) had citizen mothers; of uninsured youths who resided in states with high criminalization policies, 9.37% (95% CI, 8.90%-9.87%) had noncitizen mothers and 5.91% (95% CI, 5.64%-6.20%) had citizen mothers. In states with few immigrant integration policies, the probability of uninsurance among youths with noncitizen mothers was 3.3% (95% CI, 2.3%-4.4%) higher than that among youths with citizen mothers. Among youths with noncitizen mothers, the difference in the probability of uninsurance between those residing in states with a low level vs a high level of immigrant integration policies was 2.1% (95% CI, 0.6%-3.6%). Among youths residing in states with high levels of immigrant criminalization policies, those with noncitizen mothers had a 2.6% (95% CI, 1.9%-3.0%) higher probability of being uninsured compared with those whose mothers were citizens. Among youths with noncitizen mothers, the difference in the probability of uninsurance between those who resided in a state with a low level vs a state with a high level of immigrant criminalization policies was 1.7% (95% CI, 0.7%-2.7%).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The findings of this cross-sectional study suggest that among US-born Latino youths, disparities in uninsurance by maternal citizenship are associated with state-level immigrant integration and criminalization policies and that anti-immigrant policies may be associated with disparities in health care access for US-born Latino youths.

Association of maternal characteristics with latino youth health insurance disparities in the United States: a generalized structural equation modeling approach

Background

Disparities in access to care persist for Latino youth born in the United States (US). The association of maternal characteristics, such as maternal citizenship status and insurance coverage, on youth health insurance coverage is unclear and is important to examine given the recent sociopolitical shifts occurring in the US.

Methods

We analyzed pooled cross-sectional data from the 2010–2018 National Health Interview Survey to examine the association of Latina maternal citizenship status on maternal insurance coverage status and youth uninsurance among US-born Latino youth. Our study sample consisted of 15,912 US-born Latino youth (ages < 18) with linked mothers. Our outcome measures were maternal insurance coverage type and youth uninsurance and primary predictor was maternal citizenship status. Generalized structural equation modeling was used to examine the relationships between maternal characteristics (maternal citizenship, maternal insurance coverage status) and youth uninsurance.

Results

Overall, 7% of US-born Latino youth were uninsured. Just 6% of youth with US-born mothers were uninsured compared to almost 10% of those with noncitizen mothers. Over 18% of youth with uninsured mothers were uninsured compared to 2.2% among youth with mothers who had private insurance coverage. Compared to both US-born and naturalized citizen Latina mothers, noncitizen Latina mothers had 4.75 times the odds of reporting being uninsured. Once adjusted for predisposing, enabling, and need factors, maternal uninsurance was strongly associated with youth uninsurance and maternal citizenship was weakly associated with youth uninsurance among US-born Latino youth.

Conclusion

Maternal citizenship was associated with both maternal uninsurance and youth uninsurance among US-born Latino youth. Federal- and state-level health policymaking should apply a two-generational approach to ensure that mothers of children are offered affordable health insurance coverage, regardless of their citizenship status, thus reducing uninsurance among US-born Latino youth.

Immigration Policy as a Social Determinant of Health: Development and Initial Validation of a Measure to Assess Attitudes toward Immigrant Integration

Anti-immigrant policymaking in the U.S. is a critical social determinant of health compromising the wellbeing of immigrants and, by extension, communities of color. It is imperative that social work, public health, and other allied professions unite to address anti-immigrant policymaking by improving intergroup attitudes and building broader public support for immigrant integration. This study fills a gap in the literature by psychometrically developing and initially validating a measure of attitudes toward integrationist immigration policymaking. A three-stage study was conducted to explore, calibrate, and validate the factor structure using exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. Findings suggest there are two distinct but interrelated dimensions of attitudes toward integrationist immigration policies: support for the (a) extension of pathways to legal status and (b) expansion of eligibility for social rights and benefits. Initial evidence of criterion validity for the scale is offered. The utility of the measure for intergroup intervention testing is discussed.

Health Care Access and Utilization for Latino Youth in the United States: The Roles of Maternal Citizenship and Distress

OBJECTIVES

We sought to determine the associations between maternal citizenship and health care access and utilization for US-born Latino youth and to determine whether maternal distress is a moderator of the associations.

METHODS

Using 2010-2017 Integrated Public Use Microdata Series National Health Interview Survey data, multivariable logistic regressions were run to examine the associations among maternal citizenship and health care access and utilization for US-born Latino youth. Maternal citizenship and distress interactions were tested.

RESULTS

Noncitizen mothers had higher odds of reporting uninsurance, lack of transportation for delaying care, and lower odds of health care utilization for their youth than citizen mothers. Compared with no distress, moderate and severe distress were positively associated with uninsurance, delayed medical care due to cost, lack of transportation, and having had an emergency department visit for their youth. Moderate distress was positively associated with youth having had a doctor's office visit. Noncitizen mothers with moderate distress were less likely to report their youth having had an emergency department visit than citizen mothers with moderate distress. Among severely distressed mothers, noncitizen mothers were more likely to report youth uninsurance and delayed care due to lack of transportation compared with citizen mothers.

CONCLUSIONS

Health care access and utilization among US-born Latino youth are influenced by maternal citizenship and distress. Maternal distress moderates the associations among maternal citizenship and youth's health care access and use. Almost one-third of all US-born youth in the United States are Latino and current federal and state noninclusive immigration policies and anti-Latino immigrant rhetoric may exacerbate health care disparities.

Policies of Exclusion: Implications for the Health of Immigrants and Their Children

Public policies play a crucial role in shaping how immigrants adapt to life in the United States. Federal, state, and local laws and administrative practices impact immigrants' access to education, health insurance and medical care, cash assistance, food assistance, and other vital services. Additionally, immigration enforcement activities have substantial effects on immigrants' health and participation in public programs, as well as effects on immigrants' families. This review summarizes the growing literature on the consequences of public policies for immigrants' health. Some policies are inclusive and promote immigrants' adaptation to the United States, whereas other policies are exclusionary and restrict immigrants' access to public programs as well as educational and economic opportunities. We explore the strategies that researchers have employed to tease out these effects, the methodological challenges of undertaking such studies, their varying impacts on immigrant health, and steps that can be undertaken to improve the health of immigrants and their families.