The structural impacts of enforcement policy on Latino immigrant health

Order Keepers or Immigration Agents? Latine Immigrant Views of Law Enforcement in Healthcare Settings

BACKGROUND

Police and security presence in healthcare settings have grown. There are few studies exploring perceptions of these law enforcement agents among US Latine immigrants, who can be vulnerable to immigration enforcement actions due to past and ongoing criminalization and anti-immigrant policies.

OBJECTIVE

To explore Latine immigrants' perceptions of law enforcement in healthcare settings.

DESIGN

Exploratory, semi-structured qualitative interviews asked participants about their perspectives of law enforcement in healthcare settings.

PARTICIPANTS

English- and Spanish-speaking adult patients (n = 19) from a Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC) in Los Angeles, CA, serving predominantly low-income Latine immigrants.

APPROACH

We used the framework method for analysis to establish a codebook and inform our thematic interpretation.

KEY RESULTS

We identified three themes: (1) perceptions of safety offered by police officers are separated from the role of immigration officers; (2) perceptions of police officers are integrated into broader perceptions of the healthcare system; and (3) lived experiences, including immigration status, influenced valence response to officer uniforms and perceptions of officers. Most participants viewed police officers positively as maintaining order and safety, separating them from federal immigration enforcement actions, and reflecting on local, state, and organizational "sanctuary" or immigrant-friendly policies. Individuals with precarious immigration status more often saw officers as intimidating. Immigration enforcement remained a key concern.

CONCLUSIONS

Differentiating police and security roles from immigration enforcement in healthcare could improve Latine immigrant trust and access. Future studies should explore perspectives of Latine immigrants in localities without sanctuary laws or organizational immigrant-friendly policies.

Mexican-origin women's individual and collective strategies to access and share health-promoting resources in the context of exclusionary immigration and immigrant policies

BACKGROUND

A growing literature has documented the social, economic, and health impacts of exclusionary immigration and immigrant policies in the early 21st century for Latiné communities in the US, pointing to immigration and immigrant policies as forms of structural racism that affect individual, family, and community health and well-being. Furthermore, the past decade has seen an increase in bi-partisan exclusionary immigration and immigrant policies. Immigration enforcement has been a major topic during the 2024 Presidential election cycle, portending an augmentation of exclusionary policies towards immigrants. Within this context, scholars have called for research that highlights the ways in which Latiné communities navigate exclusionary immigration and immigrant policies, and implications for health. This study examines ways in which Mexican-origin women in a midwestern northern border community navigate restrictive immigration and immigrant policies to access health-promoting resources and care for their well-being.

METHODS

We conducted a grounded theory analysis drawing on interviews with 48 Mexican-origin women in Detroit, Michigan, who identified as being in the first, 1.5, or second immigrant generation. Interviews were conducted in English or Spanish, depending on participants' preferences, and were conducted at community-based organizations or other locations convenient to participants in 2013-2014.

RESULTS

Women reported encountering an interconnected web of institutional processes that used racializing markers to infer legal status and eligibility to access health-promoting resources. Our findings highlight women's use of both individual and collective action to navigate exclusionary policies and processes, working to: (1) maintain access to health-promoting resources; (2) limit labeling and stigmatization; and (3) mitigate adverse impacts of immigrant policing on health and well-being. The strategies women engaged were shaped by both the immigration processes and structures they confronted, and the resources to which they had access to within their social network.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest a complex interplay of immigration-related policies and processes, social networks, and health-relevant resources. They highlight the importance of inclusive policies to promote health for immigrant communities. These findings illuminate women's agency in the context of structural violence facing immigrant women and are particularly salient in the face of anti-immigrant rhetoric and exclusionary immigration and immigrant policies.

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.