Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Fact check: Immigrant crime
Executive Summary
The broad body of recent research shows immigrants are not more likely to commit crimes than U.S.-born residents, and many studies find they are substantially less likely to be incarcerated or arrested for felony offenses. National and long-run analyses — including a Northwestern University study (March 14, 2025) and a 150-year NBER working paper — report immigrants have had lower incarceration rates than the U.S.-born, with current gaps near 60% lower incarceration for immigrants [1] [2]. At the same time, enforcement datasets document specific categories of criminal arrests among noncitizens — for example, U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s Fiscal Year 2025 tally of 8,814 arrests of criminal aliens — but those enforcement counts do not by themselves establish higher overall crime rates among immigrant populations and cover a subset of interactions with immigration authorities [3].
1. What supporters claim: “Immigrants are safer than commonly portrayed”
Multiple academic and policy analyses argue that immigrants commit fewer crimes and have lower incarceration rates than U.S.-born people. A Northwestern University study analyzing 150 years of U.S. Census data found immigrants have never been incarcerated at higher rates than the native-born and currently exhibit about a 60% lower incarceration rate (published March 14, 2025) [1]. The National Bureau of Economic Research working paper reaching similar conclusions covers 1870–2020, showing the incarceration gap has widened over time and concluding immigrants are more law-abiding on average [2]. The American Immigration Council and Migration Policy Institute synthesize multiple studies and report that rising immigration coincided with falling crime rates nationally, and that inclusive local policies can reduce crime by improving cooperation with law enforcement [4] [5] [6].
2. What critics point to: enforcement arrests and specific offense counts
Federal enforcement and border agency data are frequently cited by critics who argue immigrants pose a criminal threat; these datasets record arrests and convictions tied to immigration status or criminal history. For example, U.S. Customs and Border Protection reported 8,814 arrests of criminal aliens in Fiscal Year 2025, with leading convictions including DUI, illegal entry/re-entry, and assault-related offenses [3]. Those figures show real instances of criminal conduct by noncitizens and are used to argue for stronger immigration enforcement. However, this evidence is narrow in scope: it reflects arrests processed by particular agencies and does not provide a population-rate comparison to the U.S.-born or adjust for differences in exposure, reporting, or policing practices [3].
3. Reconciling the two sides: population rates, denominators, and timeframes matter
Comparing enforcement tallies to population-level risk requires careful denominator work. Longitudinal and cross-sectional research builds crime rates per capita and controls for demographic and socioeconomic factors; these studies consistently find no positive link between immigration and higher crime rates, and in many cases a negative association [7] [8] [6]. State-level reports, like the Texas Department of Public Safety analysis, have found undocumented residents exhibit lower felony arrest rates than native-born citizens across violent, property, and drug offenses [9]. The difference between an enforcement count and a population rate is critical: arrests alone do not equal higher per-person crime risk and may reflect enforcement priorities, immigration laws, or reporting differences.
4. Methodological caveats that change the story depending on the lens
Research findings diverge by methodology: arrest or conviction counts from immigration agencies capture enforcement activity, while census- and survey-based studies measure incidence per population. Sanctuary policy studies emphasize that policies increasing trust in police lead to better crime reporting and do not raise crime rates, suggesting local policy context matters [4]. Historical and long-run analyses control for age, labor-market conditions, and selection effects — the processes by which immigrants differ from the native-born — and still find lower incarceration and crime rates [2] [1]. Policy debates often conflate short-term enforcement metrics with long-term population risk, producing conflicting narratives unless the methodological differences are made explicit.
5. Bottom line for policymakers and the public: nuance over headlines
The most robust, recent evidence indicates immigration is not associated with higher crime rates and that immigrants are less likely to be incarcerated or arrested for felonies than U.S.-born residents, according to multiple peer-reviewed and policy analyses [1] [2] [6]. Enforcement statistics such as CBP’s FY2025 criminal-aliens count document legitimate public-safety incidents but are insufficient to overturn population-level findings because they lack comparable denominators and broader context [3]. For policy, the evidence implies focusing on targeted enforcement for serious offenses, improving data transparency on denominators and outcomes, and considering community policies that enhance reporting and cooperation without equating immigration status with criminality [4] [9] [7].