 Yn ystod, wrth gwrs Gwyrddach, yng Nghyrch yn Ysgrifennu Ffacolwyr, Yn Ysgrifennu in violence within community and neighbourhood contexts. Presently, he is investigating spatial temporal trends in lethal violence across neighbourhoods in the city of Chicago. This work has pioneered the application of a semi-parametric group-based trajectory methodology and exploratory spatial data analysis to examine community-level violence trajectories in their spatial organisation. In addition, his most recent project examines offender attributions regarding deviant behaviour, individual processes of social learning and community-labourhood factors that may contribute to intimate partner violence. Let's welcome Jorge Chavez. Good afternoon and thank you for having me here. It's always great to be back in New York City and at John Jay. And I get the benefit of having heard our three earlier speakers, that they would do a really nice job of kind of setting everything up that I'll be talking about and give me a nice chance to kind of really kind of contrast the research that I'm doing with kind of what they've shown so far today because I'm coming from a little bit of an outside perspective and I'm going to focus really on what the experience is for immigrant communities in very small rural areas where there's not a very large group of population focusing really on the effects of local and state-level enforcement. So what is it really like down at that level where laws get implemented and look at the impact intersection of federal policy, local communities and what kind of trickle-down effect is of deportation policies on behaviour. And I'll be able to kind of jump over some of my earlier slides. I don't have to set this up as a social problem because our speakers have already spoken about that. What I find interesting is that, you know, in Michelle's talk about federalism here, she says that, you know, it's almost an outsourcing of immigration policy to the states and local authorities. But really it's almost even beyond that to some degree. There's some cooperation, there's some shared authority, but states to a large degree have overtaken that towards the horse, sorry, the cart pulling the horse rather than the other way around. And I have this graph here to show kind of part of that trend. If you look at state-level initiatives, so now looking at county, now looking at federal laws, looking at legislation at the state level, we've seen over 9,000 state-level resolutions or pieces of legislation that have been proposed at the state level. Of these, over 1,000 have been actually enacted into law with every state in the nation kind of participating in creating their own little immigration policy. And these policies have tremendous potential for impact here. And you see that this trend really begins around 2005 so that this is kind of part of the state's kind of rising to this rhetoric about our immigration system is broken. We've got a problem with immigration. Immigration is criminogenic. Immigration, you know, takes away from our economy. So it's kind of a local response to that rhetoric in addition above and beyond that federal response because the federal system is being perceived as being broken and unable to do the job. And these laws have targeted all kinds of different types of initiatives and issues. Focusing on things like, as was mentioned earlier, but also other things like access to health and welfare services, access to education, ability to get employment. So targeting all different kinds of domains. And the interesting issue here is that, as Juan mentioned, that some of these policies can be pro-immigrant, providing services, providing access, or restrictive and anti-immigrant, really limiting access to not just unauthorized immigrants, but also immigrants who have legal status and authorized status in the country. So it's really a huge mix of policy at the local level and it's important for us to kind of understand what that means for communities. And for me what's interesting is that if you look at the immigration patterns of today compared to what they've been historically, is that we're seeing the largest growth in those areas that have not historically had large immigrant populations. So while New York City has a very large immigrant population, and as Shirley mentioned, it's got a long history of it. If you look at where immigration is occurring today, it's really in rural, small communities. The places I've experienced are the largest growth of those ones that have never had immigrants before and that don't only have infrastructure in place in order to welcome these populations in and that are responding in sometimes not so welcoming manners. So it's interesting for us to understand this process. In prior work that I've done with Marie Provine, we looked at what type of places create policies targeting immigrant. What type of places create restrictive policies? What type of places create more welcoming policies? And we controlled for things like, well, are there higher crime rates? Is the economy doing badly? Is there a drain on resources? And none of that stuff seems to matter when it comes to restrictionist policies. Restrictionist policies are responding to conservative ideology. The belief and perception that immigrant populations are bad, criminogenic, or problems regardless of what the reality actually shows. In terms of pro-immigrant policies, what you see is that you need to have a critical mass of Latino populations or immigrant populations in order to kind of drive policy. So despite the rhetoric what drives the restrictionist policy is the belief that immigrants are bad. And so policy has been shown in earlier research that it can have multiple domains of impact and most of this work has focused on federal-level policy targeting immigrants. And very little research has looked at state-level policy. And state-level policy, I'm going to argue, is a little bit different because federal policy, we know that we've got special kind of departments and offices and organizations that are meant to target immigration enforcement. At the local level, this is being done by police. This is the police in a democratic society that is really meant to protect and serve. It has a very different role rather than targeting immigration policy. And there could be some serious consequences in using these communities when police are starting to usurp this role of immigration enforcement, which I'll talk a little bit about today. The interesting part of this study is that really when it started was really looking at the kind of educational pipeline. You know, what is going on with immigrant children as you're going from elementary school to middle school, high school and then college and where they fall into the gaps. And as we were doing this research, the issue of recent legislative changes kind of kept coming up again and again. And so we kind of delved more into that. It's part of an ethnographic study. The primary researcher for this study spent two years living in the community and it's based on semi-structured interviews that looked specifically at how immigrants' lives were impacted by recent legislative changes. And we're able to look at families that have both authorized immigrants and unauthorized immigrants. And in the chapter that's in the edited volume what we saw is that the issue of mixed status families is very important because immigration as a status is an individual sort of characteristic or measure in terms of real life, it's a whole family is being impacted by the status. People, whether it's siblings or parents or children or loved ones, these mixed statuses within families are problematic for multiple people and not just that one individual. And we talked to 40 families in a small rural Midwestern county in Indiana. And so we'll talk about their experiences. Indiana, where we're doing the study, is kind of representative of much of other parts of the country where the Latino population and immigrant population is growing but they haven't historically been there before. And they're facing the economy, economic problems the same way that we're seeing in the rest of the country. And it's interesting because if you look at where the growth is happening the most now it really is in those areas outside New York, outside Los Angeles, outside Chicago, in these kind of smaller rural areas. In terms of immigration policy at the local level Indiana is very much modeled on Arizona and their SB 1070. What we see is that they participate in all counties in Indiana in secure communities which was mentioned earlier and they've implemented an omnivist policy that pretty much matched in detail by detail the Arizona policy. Yet you don't really hear about these Midwestern states enacting these same sorts of laws. And it plays numerous restrictions not just in terms of getting access to licenses so that was one of those things but in terms of access to education in terms of access to healthcare and health services in terms of being able to find employment and they're also creating harsher penalties for immigration violations so that not only do you have federal consequences where you've got state and local consequences as well that are being enforced by the police which is something of a different animal. And so in the earlier chapter we focus on how this impacts family. What it means for sensitive security, for a sense of isolation, for a child well-being and at this point we've kind of taken a different focus and said what does it mean for how the community interacts with the police? What does it mean for potential impact on crime? And so what we're seeing is that this is really having an impact on kind of the community's perceptions of the police in general in terms of creating more legal cynicism and mistrust of the police. And the ironic part is that recent research suggests that immigrant communities in general as a whole are more likely to trust the police initially. They're more likely to have a more positive view of the police. Recent research by Kirk and Papa Christel that was done in New York City suggests that immigrant communities compared to non-immigrant communities are more likely to have more favorable views of police and these immigration policies are having an impact where they're likely to change that. And so this first quote refers to that specifically with the new law and I know this is small so I don't have a view of policy on the back so I'll read this one quickly. It's difficult to have trust in the police. It's very difficult to tell you the truth. Before you get here, everyone tells you about the police here that they are very straight or strict. The police are, you can't say this, you can't do anything. And as time passed we noticed that many police are like the same in Mexico. They're corrupt, that they have their preferences, that sometimes they treat the people bad. And this was referring specifically to how these new policies are changing that rather than being police means that maybe they can trust that they can no longer have that trust in place. And this has real consequences for how police can do their jobs because if the community doesn't trust them then they need that community to have their backs to provide information and provide help. And the second quote, the police now, some are very racist. You don't know who to trust. I think my kids are fine, but we're illegal. It affects us because of some, many of us lose out. We are on a straight path but others are running around and because of them they stop all of us. And so again here, the people in the communities that we spoke to really kind of make a distinction between enforcement of real laws, targeting real crimes and police targeting these issues of having authorized documentation, having papers and they see a real divide here. And this is by citizens and non-citizens in these kind of rural communities. So this idea of fear that's really referred to earlier is very real in their lives. And the fear is not only for those who are unauthorized but also for authorized citizens. And this third quote, like if someone causes a problem I feel trust because we too have the temporary protection that government gives us. But we stay quiet, it's better if it is someone else. So people who have legal documentation, people who are citizens are also saying that this has an impact on their lives because they're being targeted as well. They'd rather not get involved, which means that when there is a problem in the community that they will not be responsive to the police. And that's a real problem. In addition to this, there's a problem of diffusion. Not only is it that we're worried about unauthorized immigrants, but the perception starts to increase beyond the police that the entire immigrant community in general is criminogenic or problematic. And we see that in these two quotes looking at people talking about schools and the immigrant children. That they're all being seen as gang members, as criminals, as offenders. That this rhetoric that's tied to immigrants, authorized or unauthorized, starts to expand throughout the community where they are now all seen as criminal regardless of their behavior. And again, that has consequences. Surely talked about social disorganization. This mistrust of the police, mistrust in each other, mistrust and lack of communication can raise levels of crime in communities. And finally, in this community, they talked about feeling marginalized, that they're no longer a part of it, that in issue they were welcome in the community, but now given the recent legal changes, the recent rhetoric, even though nothing else has changed the community, their behavior hasn't changed, but they're no longer welcome. And so this is the dynamic that we're trying to understand. And remember, this is kind of small rural communities where people can't hide, people can't get lost in the mix like you can in New York City. And I have a couple of other slides here that refer to some of the issues that were raised by Juan in terms of what's going on at the federal level. But I think, let me just show the tension here that we're going to continue to see is that although at the federal level, at the national level, the movement is towards a deferred action. The movement is towards let's stop enforcement, let's stop deportations. The reality is that at the local level, there's real concern about how this is actually occurring. And although the language says let's defer action, let's provide a pathway, let's provide an avenue, what we're seeing in terms of deportations is increases, increases and increases. With more than a four-fold increase over the last 10 years. And record levels that we haven't seen historically. But I'll stop right here. Thank you.