Abstract
The figure of the “criminal immigrant” occupies a central place in contemporary U.S. immigration discourse, shaping public perception, enforcement priorities, and legal doctrine. Yet a substantial body of empirical research consistently demonstrates that immigrants—both documented and undocumented—commit crimes at lower rates than native-born citizens. This Note examines why the narrative of immigrant criminality persists despite this evidence and how it influences the development and operation of immigration law. It argues that “immigrant” functions not only as a legal category but also as a socially constructed marker of Otherness, encompassing perceived differences in race, language, culture, and religion. Through this lens, political rhetoric, media narratives, and legal institutions work together to frame immigrants as presumptively dangerous outsiders. The Note shows how this framing collapses civil immigration regulation into punitive control, legitimizes identity-based suspicion, and weakens individualized justice. Ultimately, it contends that the criminal immigrant narrative persists not because it reflects empirical reality, but because criminalization operates as a governance strategy for managing perceived outsiders and organizing belonging within the legal system.
Recommended Citation
Fernandez, Katerina
(2026)
"The Myth of the Immigrant as a Criminal: Rhetoric, Otherness, and the Legal Construction of Danger,"
Immigration and Human Rights Law Review: Vol. 7:
Iss.
1, Article 3.
Available at:
https://scholarship.law.uc.edu/ihrlr/vol7/iss1/3
Included in
Civil Rights and Discrimination Commons, Human Rights Law Commons, Immigration Law Commons, Law and Psychology Commons, Law and Society Commons, Law Enforcement and Corrections Commons, National Security Law Commons, Policy Design, Analysis, and Evaluation Commons, Social Policy Commons