Table 4.

Race/Ethnicity-Specific Analyses of the Relationships Between County Immigration Enforcement Policies and Violent Victimization, 2005–2014

	Model 1: Longitudinal hybrid model					Model 2: Fixed effects model
	Between-person difference		Within-person change
Characteristics	b	(SE)	b		(SE)	b		(SE)
Panel A: Latinos
Secure Communities activated	−.063	(.183)	.536	*	(.257)	.629	***	(.136)
287(g) jail enforcement agreement	.158	(.129)	.323		(.521)	−.297		(.250)
287(g) task force agreement	.267	(.233)	.826	*	(.415)	.754	**	(.265)
Anti-detainer policy activated	.029	(.209)	.134		(.450)	.368		(.195)
Number of persons		49,500				550
Number of person-interviews		131,000				2,100
Panel B: Non-Latino Whites
Secure Communities activated	.070	(.087)	.136		(.114)	.142		(.094)
287(g) jail enforcement agreement	−.171	(.178)	.548		(.391)	.291		(.177)
287(g) task force agreement	.259	(.137)	.047		(.355)	.027		(.179)
Anti-detainer policy activated	.224	(.130)	−.085		(.265)	−.044		(.148)
Number of persons		237,000				2,600
Number of person-interviews		725,000				10,500
Panel B: Non-Latino Blacks
Secure Communities activated	.184	(.166)	.013		(.216)	−.058		(.130)
287(g) jail enforcement agreement	.043	(.154)	−.575		(.470)	−.578		(.330)
287(g) task force agreement	.368	(.291)	.551		(.473)	.261		(.421)
Anti-detainer policy activated	−.062	(.282)	.333		(.313)	.656		(.581)
Number of persons	36,500					500
Number of person-interviews	97,500					2,000

Note. SE = standard error.

^*p < 0.05

^**p < 0.01

^***p < 0.001 (2-tailed test).

All models included the control variables used in the full-sample analyses (coefficients omitted from the table).