The present study was an intragroup examination of noncitizen Latino drug traffickers convicted in the federal courts from 2006 to 2014. Drawing upon focal concerns theory and Sayad’s state-centered perspective on the role of governments in framing the crime–immigration debate, this study assessed whether offenders’ national origin conditions the effects of immigration status on the odds of receiving a downward departure (lenient sentencing) and the magnitude of the sentence discount imposed. Particular attention was paid to whether any effects worked to the detriment of Mexicans relative to non-Mexicans. The findings revealed that the effect of immigration status was contingent on offenders’ national origin for the departure decision, but not the sentence discount. While being undocumented served to decrease the odds of a downward departure regardless of national origin, the effects were greater for Mexicans than for non-Mexicans. These findings indicate that contrary to the goals of the U.S. sentencing guidelines to reduce unwarranted disparities surrounding national origin, the current federal sentencing structure allows them to thrive.
AlbonettiC. A. (1997). Sentencing under the federal sentencing guidelines: Effects of defendant characteristics, guilty pleas, and departures on sentence outcomes for drug offenses, 1991-1992. Law and Society Review, 31, 789–822.
2.
BrennanP. K.SpohnC. (2008). Race/Ethnicity and sentencing outcomes among drug offenders in North Carolina. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 24, 371–398.
3.
BushwayS. D.PiehlA. M. (2001). Judging judicial discretion: Legal factors and racial discrimination in sentencing. Law and Society Review, 35, 733–764.
4.
CitrinJ.SidesJ. (2008). Immigration and the imagined community in Europe and the United States. Political Studies, 56, 33–56.
5.
CrowM. S.JohnsonK. A. (2008). Race, ethnicity, and habitual-offender sentencing. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 19, 63–83.
6.
DemuthS. (2002). The effect of citizenship status on sentencing outcomes in drug cases. Federal Sentencing Reporter, 14, 271–275.
7.
DemuthS.SteffensmeierD. (2004). Ethnicity effects on sentence outcomes in large urban courts: Comparison among white, black, and Hispanic defendants. Social Science Quarterly, 85, 994–1011.
8.
EspenshadeT. J. (1995). Unauthorized immigration to the United States. Annual Review of Sociology, 21, 195–216.
9.
Executive Office of the President of the United States. (2014). National drug control strategy, 2014. Washington, DC: Office of National Drug Control Policy.
10.
FeldmeyerB.UlmerJ. T. (2011). Racial/Ethnic threat and federal sentencing. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 48, 238–270.
11.
FrantzenD.WorleyR. (2008). Inter-ethnic variation in sentencing for Hispanic drug offenders. Justice Policy Journal, 5, 1–25.
12.
FreemanG. P.BirrellB. (2001). Divergent paths of immigration politics in the United States and Australia. Population and Development Review, 27, 525–551.
13.
FrenzelE. D.BallJ. D. (2007). Effects of individual characteristics on plea negotiations under sentencing guidelines. Journal of Ethnicity in Criminal Justice, 5, 59–82.
HaganJ.LeviR.DinovitzerR. (2008). The symbolic violence of the crime-immigration nexus: Migrant mythologies in the Americas. Criminology and Public Policy, 7, 95–112.
16.
HaganJ.PalloniA. (1999). Sociological criminology and the mythology of Hispanic immigration and crime. Social Problems, 46, 617–632.
17.
HartleyR. D.ArmendarizL. F. (2011). Border justice? Sentencing federal narcotics offenders in southwest border districts: A focus on citizenship status. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 27, 43–62.
18.
HuntingtonS. P. (2004). The Hispanic challenge. Foreign Policy, pp. 30–45.
19.
JaretC. (1999). Troubled by newcomers: Anti-immigrant attitudes and action during two eras of mass immigration to the United States. Journal of American Ethnic History, 18, 9–39.
20.
JohnsonB. D. (2006). The multilevel context of criminal sentencing: Integrating judge and county level influences in the study of courtroom decision making. Criminology, 44, 259–298.
21.
KauttP.SpohnC. (2002). Crack-ing down on black drug offenders? Testing for interactions among offenders’ race, drug type, and sentencing strategy in federal drug sentences. Justice Quarterly, 19, 1–35.
22.
KeoganK. (2002). A sense of place: The politics of immigration and the symbolic construction of identity in Southern California and the New York metropolitan area. Sociological Forum, 17, 223–253.
23.
LarsenL. J. (2004). The foreign-born population in the United States: 2003. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.
24.
LightM. T. (2014). The new face of legal inequality: Noncitizens and the long-term trends in sentencing disparities across U.S. district courts, 1992-2009. Law and Society Review, 48, 447–478.
25.
LightM. T.MassogliaM.KingR. D. (2014). Citizenship and punishment: The salience of national membership in U.S. criminal courts. American Sociological Review, 79, 825–847.
26.
LogueM. A. (2009). The price of being Mexican: Sentencing disparities between noncitizen Mexican and non-Mexican Latinos in the federal courts. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 31, 423–445.
27.
LogueM. A. (2011). Downward departures in U.S. federal courts: Do family ties, sex, and race/ethnicity matter?Ethnic and Racial Studies, 34, 683–706.
28.
MorinJ. L. (2008). Latinas/os and US prisons: Trends and challenges. Latino Studies, 6, 11–34.
29.
PaternosterR.BrameR.MazerolleP.PiqueroA. (1998). Using the correct statistical test for equality of regression coefficients. Criminology, 36, 859–866.
30.
PerezE. O. (2010). Explicit evidence on the import of implicit attitudes: The IAT and immigration policy judgments. Political Behavior, 32, 517–545.
31.
ReedtL.SemischC.BlackwellK. (2013, November). Effective use of federal sentencing data. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Society of Criminology, Atlanta, GA.
SayadA. (2004). The suffering of the immigrant. Cambridge, England: Polity.
34.
ScottB. (2011). U.S. v. Booker: System failure or system fix?University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 160, 195–208.
35.
SteffensmeierD.DemuthS. (2000). Ethnicity and sentencing outcomes in U.S. federal courts: Who is punished more harshly?American Sociological Review, 65, 705–729.
SteffensmeierD.UlmerJ.KramerJ. (1998). The interaction of race, gender, and age in criminal sentencing: The punishment cost of being young, black, and male. Criminology, 36, 763–798.
38.
SuttonJ. R. (2013). Structural bias in the sentencing of felony defendants. Social Science Research, 42, 1207–1221.
39.
U.S. Sentencing Commission. (2014a). Guidelines manual. Washington, DC: Author.
40.
U.S. Sentencing Commission. (2014b). Sourcebook of federal sentencing statistics. Washington, DC: Author.
41.
U.S. v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005).
42.
U.S. v. Borrero-Isaza, 887 F.2d 1349, 1352 (8th Cir. 1989).
43.
U.S. v. Mistretta, 488 U.S. 361 (1989).
44.
U.S. v. Onwuemene, 933 F.2d 650, 651 (8th Cir. 1991).
45.
WolfeS. E.PyroozD. C.SpohnC. C. (2011). Unraveling the effect of offender citizenship status on federal sentencing outcomes. Social Science Research, 40, 349–362.
46.
ZarrielloE.GrayD. H. (2014). The war against public enemy number one: U.S. miscalculations in Mexico’s War on Drugs. Global Security Studies, 5, 1–11.
