About

Caitlin Patler, Ph.D., is an Associate Professor of Public Policy at the University of California, Berkeley Goldman School of Public Policy. She is also a faculty affiliate of the Berkeley Interdisciplinary Migration Initiative, the Berkeley Population Center, and the Institute for Research on Labor and Employment. Before joining UC Berkeley, Dr. Patler was an Associate Professor of Sociology at UC Davis, where she contributed to the establishment of the Global Migration Center. Her research focuses on the origins and reproduction of inequality in the United States, particularly through the lens of immigration laws, legal statuses, and law enforcement institutions. She also investigates the spillover and intergenerational consequences of inequality on the health and wellbeing of young adults, youth, and children. Dr. Patler's teaching centers on U.S. immigration policy and research methods. She employs multiple methodologies in her research, including analysis of population survey data and administrative data, as well as designing, fielding, and analyzing original surveys and in-depth interviews. Her work is informed by two decades of research-practice partnerships with legal and civil rights organizations focused on immigration detention, access to education for immigrant youth, and low-wage labor markets. Dr. Patler has received numerous awards and grants for her research, including support from the National Science Foundation, National Academy of Education/Spencer Foundation, Russell Sage Foundation, Sociological Initiatives Foundation, and the American Sociological Association. She also serves on the Editorial Board of Social Problems. Among her recognitions are the 2021 UC Davis Academic Senate Distinguished Teaching Award and several awards for her publications from sociological associations. Additionally, Dr. Patler has contributed to public discourse through co-authoring an Op-Ed in the New York Times on the harms of imprisoning immigrant children and an Amicus Brief for the U.S. Supreme Court summarizing empirical research on the benefits of DACA.

Research topics

• Sociology
• Political Science
• Criminology
• Law
• Computer Security
• Psychology
• Geography
• Social psychology
• Clinical psychology

Selected publications

• ICE Arrests across Trump’s First and Second Terms: Variation in Targeting, Method, and Geography

  National Bureau of Economic Research · 2026-02-01 · 2 citations

  reportOpen access

  Deportation is often framed as a necessary tool to protect public safety by removing people who commit crimes.We use newly available, and externally validated, administrative data containing all US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) arrests from September 2015-October 2025.Beyond demonstrating national trends in immigration arrests by method and composition over time, we are also able to compare, for the first time, apprehensions spanning the start of the two Trump administrations, both of which focused on mass immigration enforcement.Our results reveal that the reality of immigration enforcement diverges sharply from the public narrative: while arrests spiked at the outset of both Trump presidencies, there were significant declines in the percentage of arrested individuals with criminal convictions, with especially marked declines in 2025.Examining potential mechanisms reveals that this is driven by a change in ICE tactics, but even conditional on tactic, as arrests rose, the percent with a criminal record declined.Moreover, we find substantial heterogeneity over time and across ICE Areas of Responsibility.Taken together, our results highlight a substantial gap between political rhetoric and reality.

  PublisherDOI

• ICE Arrests across Trump's First and Second Terms: Variation in Targeting, Method, and Geography

  SSRN Electronic Journal · 2026-01-01

  preprintOpen access
  PublisherDOI

• The US Deportation System: History, Impacts, and New Empirical Research

  RSF The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences · 2025-11-01 · 1 citations

  articleOpen access1st authorCorresponding

  The United States is unique in the size and scope of its deportation system. Between 2001 and 2022, US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) carried out nearly 6.5 million deportations. Deportation is often framed as a singular event that happens to an individual. We conceptualize deportation more broadly as a system that encompasses premigration, within-US, and post-deportation contexts and outcomes. In this introduction, we explain this conceptualization, establishing the existence of differential paths into the deportation system that begin even prior to migration, depending on migrants’ access to paths to legal entry, which are shaped by political and economic factors. We then review multidisciplinary literature on the implications of the deportation system for individuals, families, and communities in the United States, as well as for the US economy, politics, and political outcomes. Finally, we review research on post-deportation outcomes in countries of origin and how deportation can lead to remigration to the United States, thus rebooting the deportation system. While a broad and interdisciplinary literature has helped illuminate the deportation system, there is still much to learn. To that end, we end with a description of the contributions of this issue and directions and challenges for future research.

  PublisherOA PDFDOI

• The health-related experiences of detained immigrants with and without mental illness

  Journal of Migration and Health · 2025-01-01 · 3 citations

  articleOpen access1st authorCorresponding

  • We analyze health-related experiences of detained immigrants, by mental illness status • We find high rates of poor health, care interruptions, solitary confinement • Especially poor outcomes among those with mental illness • Immigration detention likely harmful for all detainees, particularly those with mental illness Incarcerated individuals with mental illness face unique health challenges, yet we know little about individuals with mental illness who are detained by US immigration authorities. We aimed to describe the health-related experiences of detained immigrants with and without mental illness. We conducted a cross-sectional telephone survey in 2021 with a sample of recently detained immigrants who were detained by Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and released in the United States in 2020-2021 (n=203). We used multivariable regression to assess the association between mental illness and the incidence of five outcomes while in immigration detention: 1) poor general health, 2) difficulty accessing medical services, 3) difficulty accessing mental health services, 4) interruptions to care, 5) and exposure to solitary confinement. 115/203 participants (56.7%) had diagnosed mental illness, most commonly depression and PTSD. Rates of poor health, difficulty accessing medical and mental health services, interruptions to care, and exposure to solitary confinement during detention were high overall, and significantly higher among individuals with mental illness. There is pressing need for policy actions and protections to mitigate health harms experienced in immigration detention.

  PublisherDOI

• Duration in Immigration Detention and Health Harms

  JAMA Network Open · 2025-01-24 · 11 citations

  articleOpen access

  Importance: Length of custody is a mechanism by which carceral systems can worsen health. However, there are fewer studies examining US immigration detention, in large part because US immigration detention is largely privately operated and opaque by design. Objectives: To examine the association between duration spent in US immigration detention with subsequent health outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used a referral sample of recently detained immigrants who were released from Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) under a series of court orders in 2020 and 2021. Data were analyzed from June 2023 to October 2024. Exposure: Detention duration less than 6 months vs 6 months or longer. Main Outcomes and Measures: We used multivariable regression analysis to assess the association of detention duration and several variables: (1) self-rated health, (2) mental illness (Kessler 6-item psychological distress scale), and (3) posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (Primary Care-PTSD-5 Screen). We then calculated the likelihood of experiencing each outcome, controlling for covariates. As a robustness check, we conducted sensitivity analyses with detention duration as a continuous measure. Results: The study included 200 respondents (mean [SD] age, 40.3 [10.1] years; 175 male [87.5%]; 149 Hispanic or Latino ethnicity [74.5%]). Results revealed a high prevalence of poor self-rated health, mental illness, and PTSD for all respondents, but especially among those who had been detained for 6 months or longer, who had significantly higher likelihood of poor or fair self-rated health (49.1% [95% CI, 40.5%-57.6%] vs 30.4% [95% CI, 21.8%-39.1%]; P < .001), mental illness (37.0% [95% CI, 28.2%-45.8%] vs 20.7% [95% CI, 12.6%-28.7%]; P < .001), and PTSD (59.3% [95% CI, 50.3%-68.3%] vs 34.8% [95% CI, 25.3%-44.3%]; P < .001). Sensitivity analysis confirmed the general robustness of these findings, with longer detention duration significantly associated with mental illness (OR, 1.11 [95% CI, 1.02-1.20]; P = .01) and PTSD (OR, 1.11 [95% CI, 1.03-1.20]; P = .005) in our adjusted models. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study, detained immigrants experienced a high prevalence of poor health, mental illness, and PTSD, with detention periods of 6 months or more associated with higher rates compared with those detained less than 6 months. Duration of custody is one mechanism by which immigration detention might be a catalyst for worsening health.

  PublisherOA PDFDOI

• Adverse Infant Health Outcomes Increased After the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election Among Non-White U.S.-born and Foreign-born Mothers

  Demography · 2024-07-25 · 5 citations

  articleOpen access

  Macro-level events such as elections can improve or harm population health across existing axes of stratification through policy changes and signals of inclusion or threat. This study investigates whether rates of, and disparities in, adverse birth outcomes between racialized and nativity groups changed after Donald Trump's November 2016 election, a period characterized by increases in xenophobic and racist messages, policies, and actions in the United States. Using data from 15,568,710 U.S. births between November 2012 and November 2018, we find that adverse birth outcomes increased after Trump's election among U.S.- and foreign-born mothers racialized as Black, Hispanic, and Asian and Pacific Islander (API), compared with the period encompassing the two Obama presidencies. Results for Whites suggest no change or a slight decrease in adverse outcomes following Trump's election, yet this finding was not robust to checks for seasonality. Black-White, Hispanic-White, and API-White disparities in adverse birth outcomes widened among both U.S.- and foreign-born mothers after Trump's election. Our findings suggest that Trump's election was a racist and xenophobic macro-level political event that undermined the health of infants born to non-White mothers in the United States.

  PublisherDOI

• Has population mental health returned to pre-pandemic levels, among and between racialized groups and by immigration status?

  SSM - Mental Health · 2024-10-30 · 2 citations

  articleOpen access1st authorCorresponding

  The COVID-19 pandemic profoundly impacted population health, including mental health, in ways that were patterned unevenly by pre-existing systemic inequalities such as structural gendered racism and xenophobia. However, it remains unclear whether pandemic-related mental health deterioration has persisted over time. Drawing on theories of disruptive events and structural racism, we conceptualize the pandemic as a prolonged macro-level disruptive event with unequal ramifications for different racialized groups and by immigration status. We use six waves (2017–2022) of repeated cross-sectional data from the California Health Interview Survey (CHIS; N = 121,063) from men and women from nine racialized and immigration status groups (US-born citizens, naturalized citizens, and noncitizens of White, Latina/o, and Asian racialized groups, respectively). We use multivariable regression to examine changes in psychological distress within each group, and then assess patterns of racialized health disparities between Latina/o and Asian groups, respectively, compared to White US-born citizens, who occupy the most structurally privileged social status. Our analyses reveal several key findings. First, we observed persistent increases in psychological distress from 2020 through 2022, relative to the pre-pandemic period (2017–2019), for all racialized and immigration status groups, among men and women. Second, few groups had returned to pre-pandemic distress levels as of 2022. Third, there was a consistent health advantage for White US-born citizens across the pre-pandemic and pandemic years, whose highest post-pandemic distress measure was lower or equivalent to the pre-pandemic distress of US-born Latina/o and Asian groups. Fourth, the psychological distress gap between the White US-born population and US-born Latina/o and Asian groups, respectively, grew or held steady through 2022. Finally, the 2020–2022 period was associated with a reduction in pre-pandemic health advantages among Asian immigrant groups, relative to US-born White citizens, especially among men. Our findings provide strong evidence that population mental health has not recovered from the pandemic period. • We analyze distress among men and women from nine racialized and immigration status groups in California from 2017 to 2022. • We assess whether mental health harms and disparities persisted across the post-pandemic period. • We find persistent increases in distress, and racialized health disparities, through 2022. • Our findings provide strong evidence that population mental health has not recovered from the pandemic period. • The COVID-19 pandemic is a prolonged disruptive event that exacerbated racialized mental health disparities.

  PublisherDOI

• “If I Talk About It, I Start Crying”

  2024-06-27

  book-chapter1st authorCorresponding

  US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) imprisons hundreds of thousands of immigrants each year, often indefinitely and with no systematic mechanism for release, leading legal experts to describe it as a system of “imprisonment without trial” (Arulanantham, 2022). Many detained immigrants are parents of dependent children (Patler and Golash-Boza, 2017). While a substantial body of literature documents the experiences of children with parents incarcerated in the US criminal legal system, fewer studies have analysed the experiences of children with parents imprisoned by immigration authorities. This chapter contributes an in-depth, subject-centred approach to understanding parental immigration imprisonment (PII) through interviews with 26 children of detained immigrants. Specifically, we describe some of the socio-emotional consequences of PII. Nearly all of the children in our study described symptoms suggestive of significant psychological distress. Moreover, some children’s behaviours extended for years following the initial parental detention, with potentially serious long-term consequences for their development and well-being. While some study participants demonstrated resilience and coping, even in the face of extensive disadvantage, our results indicate extensive collateral harms to children from the US immigration system. These findings should prompt immediate concern and action by US lawmakers – who have full power to immediately legislate an end to the use of incarceration in immigration legal proceedings.

  PublisherDOI

• Advancing Research To Address The Health Impacts Of Structural Racism In US Immigration Prisons

  Health Affairs · 2023-10-01 · 6 citations

  articleOpen accessSenior author

  The US is the world leader in imprisoning immigrants. Its mass immigration detention system emerged as an extension of mass incarceration, rooted in a legacy of racist US immigration and criminal laws. Immigration policy is a structural determinant of health that negatively affects the health of imprisoned immigrants, their families, and their communities. The systemic harms of "detention facilities," which we refer to as "immigration prisons," have been extensively documented, yet incrementalist reforms have failed to result in improved outcomes for immigrants. We argue that ending the practice of immigrant imprisonment is the most effective solution to mitigating its harms. Community-based programs are safer and less expensive than imprisonment, while also being effective at ensuring compliance with government requirements. We identify several priorities for researchers and policy makers to tackle the health inequities resulting from this structurally racist system. These include applying a critical, intersectional lens to studying the policies and practices that drive imprisonment, engaging affected communities in research and policy development, and creating an accountable and transparent system of data collection and release to inform health interventions. The reliance of the US on immigrant imprisonment is a policy choice with immense social and economic costs; dismantling it is critical to advancing health equity.

  PublisherDOI

• Looking Back: Decarcerating Immigration Prisons as a Tool for Improved Health

  American Journal of Public Health · 2023-04-13 · 6 citations

  letterOpen access1st authorCorresponding

  etween 2008 and 2018, US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) apprehended more than two million noncitizens in the United States. 1 On any given day, ICE imprisons tens of thousands of such individuals in more than 200 jails or privately operated facilities under prisonlike conditions.

  PublisherOA PDFDOI

Recent grants

• Uncertainty and Youth Well-being

  NSF · $450k · 2018–2022

Frequent coauthors

• Erin R. Hamilton

  University of California, Davis

  40 shared

• Tanya Golash‐Boza

  University of California, Merced

  26 shared

• Tina Shull

  El Colegio de la Frontera Norte

  25 shared

• Juan Antonio

  Papa Ola Lokahi

  25 shared

• María Gutiérrez

  Hospital Son Llatzer

  25 shared

• Sunaina Maira

  El Colegio de la Frontera Norte

  25 shared

• Guillermo Alonso Meneses

  25 shared

• J Mooney

  25 shared

Awards & honors

• Served on the Editorial Board of Social Problems