Understanding Crimmigration
Comprehensive Discussions at Lewis & Clark Law School
An international conference to expand the study of crimmigration took place at Lewis & Clark Law School last spring. Organized by Edmund O. Belsheim Professor of Law Juliet Stumpf in collaboration with the Crimmigration Control International Scholars Network (CINETS) and Oxford-based Border Criminologies, the event brought together legal scholars from around the world who have significantly advanced the discourse on crimmigration.
“Crimmigration” is a term that Stumpf coined in a pivotal 2006 article titled “The Crimmigration Crisis: Immigrants, Crime, and Sovereign Power.”
At the time, Stumpf sought to reshape academic understanding to better reflect contemporary society, where immigration and criminal law have become deeply intertwined. Increasingly, actions considered criminal in America are connected to a person’s immigration status. Similarly, an individual’s criminal history can affect their ability to obtain legal status or lead to deportation. Moreover, violations of immigration law are increasingly addressed through the criminal justice system. These systems are deeply racialized and their intersections exacerbate this problem.
Her article spearheaded the crimmigration movement, sparking academic debates and lively discussions. Soon after, Stumpf co-founded CINETS, a transnational, interdisciplinary network of crimmigration scholars. In 2023, she was named an Immigration Law Trailblazer by the National Law Journal.
The recent CINETS conference at the law school aimed to question and broaden the study of crimmigration to include a number of important issues, such as migration-control strategies in the Global South, the impact of colonialism, and comparisons across less-studied boundaries. The Realities of Migrant Detention and Surveillance Experts at the conference introduced a number of innovative strategies for understanding the causes and consequences of crimmigration and its impact on marginalized groups.
Arulanantham invoked the constitutional promise made by the nation’s founders that “no person—not just ‘citizens’—would be deprived of liberty without due process of law and challenged the audience to recognize how the current immigration enforcement system fails to uphold this promise, resulting in devastating consequences for immigrants.” He explained that deportation is considered a civil penalty and, as such, deportation hearings lack the protections associated with criminal proceedings, which include the right to a prompt bail hearing, to a jury trial, and to government-appointed legal representation.
A Note from the Author
As a professor and mentor at Lewis & Clark, Juliet Stumpf has inspired many students to explore their cultural backgrounds and address the injustices faced by their communities which impacts the field of crimmigration, leaving a lasting legacy of empowerment and change.
However, these measures often stem from historically discriminatory practices of social exclusion and xenophobic rhetoric, particularly targeting the Latino community in Los Angeles.
My article advocates for the decriminalization of food vending and loncheros in Los Angeles, emphasizing the need for a more inclusive and equitable approach to urban governance. Professor Stumpf inspired me to delve into my culture and heritage to understand the ways crimmigration affects Latinos in the United States.
—V.B.
Arulanantham advocated for prompt custody hearings as a reasonable accommodation for disabled individuals, and the appointment of counsel the appointment of counsel for individuals with cognitive disabilities to provide a fair immigration hearing. He believes that prolonged detention of such immigrants is a massive waste of taxpayer dollars, costing $164 per detainee per day and more than $2 billion a year.
He also discussed the case of José Antonio Franco-Gonzalez, which he litigated, to illustrate his points. Franco-Gonzalez, a 32-year-old son of two lawful permanent residents, has moderate mental retardation; he was arrested for an incident involving a rock. He pleaded guilty to assault with a deadly weapon and was sentenced to 365 days in jail. Upon completing his sentence, he was transferred to immigration custody for removal proceedings.
Other conference speakers, such as Juan Caballero, professor at the University of Florida Levin College of Law, and author Mauricio Peña, brought attention to detention centers. Peña, who is the editorial director of nonprofit Borderless Magazine, spoke on the panel, “Turning Detention Inside Out.” Peña discussed the prison-like conditions at Chicago’s largest detention center, where migrants crossing United States borders in large numbers face severe hardships, including cramped living quarters, mistreatment by detention center officials, freezing temperatures, unsanitary bathrooms, widespread illnesses, and sexual assaults.
Moreover, as immigration continues, enforcement and surveillance practices have undergone significant changes. Caballero spoke on the panel, “New Methodologies and Technologies.” He analyzed Fourth Amendment concerns related to the Department of Homeland Security’s Alternatives to Detention (ATD) program. This program has implemented SmartLink, a smartphone monitoring application designed to maintain surveillance without the fiscal costs associated with traditional detention.
SmartLink aims to address the limitations on detention space and the backlog of removal cases, but it also raises questions about privacy and the extent of government surveillance.
A Student Perspective
Manuel Avalos Robles ’26 found the conference impactful.
“The conference speakers challenged the often American-centric perspective, highlighting the struggles faced by people and countries around the world today.”
“I understand that while there is a lot of work to be done to address the injustices entrenched in government and society, it is achievable if we bring together people from diverse sectors of thought and practice.”
