How do demographic factors (age, gender, socioeconomic status) explain differences in criminality between immigrants and citizens?
Executive summary
Multiple recent, large-scale studies find immigrants — including undocumented immigrants in Texas — have lower arrest and incarceration rates than U.S.-born citizens: undocumented immigrants were arrested at less than half the rate for violent and drug crimes and about one-quarter the rate for property crimes in Texas [1] [2]. National analyses show immigrants were about 60% less likely to be incarcerated than the U.S.-born in 2020 and increases in immigrant shares have coincided with falling crime rates since the 1980s [3] [4].
1. Demographics matter: age and gender explain part of the gap
Aggregate crime statistics are strongly shaped by age and sex because crime is concentrated among younger males; immigrant populations often differ on these traits and that helps explain lower crime rates among some immigrant groups. Research cited by Stanford and other scholars links higher incarceration among U.S.-born men without high school diplomas to unemployment and family instability — factors less prevalent among many first‑generation immigrants — suggesting compositional differences in age, gender and life-course status account for part of the immigrant–native gap [5] [6].
2. Socioeconomic status (SES) is a double-edged factor
Socioeconomic disadvantage is strongly correlated with criminal justice outcomes, and SES differences can both raise and lower measured offending. Some native‑born groups with low education and weak labor-market attachment have higher incarceration and arrest rates, which inflates the apparent safety advantage of immigrants when comparisons are unadjusted [5]. But multiple sources argue that even controlling for SES, immigrants (including undocumented) still show lower arrest and incarceration rates in large datasets — notably Texas criminal records and national incarceration records [1] [7].
3. Legal status and selection effects bias comparisons
Researchers warn that immigrants are a nonrandom group: individuals who migrate often face selection pressures — willingness to take risks, strong labor incentives, and family ties — that correlate with lower criminality. Several studies point to first‑generation selection as a plausible explanation for lower offending, and Texas data differentiates documented vs. undocumented immigrants to show both groups generally have lower offending than the U.S.-born [8] [2]. The sources note that selection, not immunity, explains part of the gap [9].
4. Measurement differences and data sources change the picture
Different measures (arrests vs. convictions vs. incarceration) and jurisdictions produce different findings. The Texas dataset — rare because it records immigration status — finds undocumented immigrants have the lowest offending rates across many serious crimes [2] [8]. Nationally, incarceration analyses spanning 1870–2020 show immigrants have been less likely to be incarcerated since 1960 and markedly so by 2020 [6] [7]. Sources warn arrest data can reflect policing practices and bias, while incarceration is a stricter measure tied to conviction [5].
5. Contextual and policy environments shape outcomes
Research finds immigrant presence does not raise crime rates and in some cases corresponds with declines in homicide where long-established immigrant communities and inclusive policies exist [4] [7]. The Migration Policy Institute and American Immigration Council synthesize work showing higher immigrant shares coincided with large national crime declines since the 1980s, emphasizing that policy context — enforcement focus, labor market opportunities, and community integration — mediates criminal outcomes [4] [7].
6. Competing findings and unresolved questions
Not all reporting is uniform: international or country-specific analyses sometimes show higher rates for particular migrant groups or crimes (Wikipedia notes UK analyses and other European studies), and the relationship can vary by origin country, age cohort, and crime type [10]. Sources explicitly call for more research into mechanisms — selection, labor markets, family formation, policing bias — and caution that aggregate findings do not eliminate localized variation [5] [10].
7. What the evidence supports, and what it does not
Available sources consistently support three facts: immigrants overall have not increased U.S. crime rates [4], undocumented immigrants in Texas were arrested at far lower rates than the U.S.-born for violent, drug, and property crimes [1] [2], and immigrants were substantially less likely to be incarcerated in recent decades [3] [7]. Available sources do not mention definitive causal proof that any single demographic factor fully explains the gap; instead, they point to a mix of age, gender, SES, selection, and policy contexts as partial explanations [5] [9].
Limitations: these conclusions rely on the cited studies and jurisdictions (notably Texas and national incarceration series); local variations and some international findings diverge, and measurement choice (arrest vs. conviction vs. incarceration) influences results [2] [5] [10].