Many studies conclude that immigrant populations have lower incarceration, arrest or conviction rates, although results vary by location, offense, legal status and methodology.
Research involving Texas has been especially valuable because the state maintains unusually detailed information that allows analysts to examine immigration status in criminal records.
A peer-reviewed study using Texas data found that undocumented immigrants had lower arrest rates than native-born citizens for violent, property and drug offenses.
Other analyses of Texas conviction data have found lower homicide conviction rates among undocumented immigrants than among native-born Americans.
A Reuters fact-check summarized this evidence when examining exaggerated claims about immigrant homicide.
For 2013–2022, one cited analysis placed the homicide conviction rate among undocumented immigrants in Texas at approximately 2.2 per 100,000, compared with about 3.0 for native-born Americans.
One state cannot perfectly represent the entire country. But the findings contradict claims that undocumented immigrants inevitably produce an unusually high crime rate.
Does Research Prove Ruffalo’s Exact Sentence?
No—not in the precise form he used.
Evidence supports several propositions:
-
Native-born people commit most American crime in absolute numbers because they constitute most of the population.
-
Immigrants are not responsible for most crime.
-
Numerous studies find lower offending rates among immigrants than among the native-born.
-
Claims of a nationwide immigrant crime wave are often unsupported or exaggerated.
But “most crimes are committed by white people, non-immigrants” combines race and immigration status in a way not fully measured by one national dataset.
Depending on the offense and the measurement used, white people may constitute the largest number of arrests. In other categories, the racial distribution differs. FBI race categories may also include Hispanic people within the broader white classification unless ethnicity is considered separately.
The word “most” can mean either the largest group or more than 50 percent. Those are not always the same.
Ruffalo’s statement is therefore best described as a broadly plausible political summary rather than a rigorously demonstrated national statistic.
Race Categories Create Additional Problems
Official racial classifications are imperfect.
“White” in federal data can include people from diverse ethnic and national backgrounds. Hispanic or Latino identity is frequently recorded as ethnicity rather than race. Some agencies submit incomplete information, and individuals may be classified differently across systems.
Immigration status adds another layer of uncertainty.
A white offender could be a recent immigrant from Europe. A Black, Asian or Latino offender could be a native-born American whose family has lived in the United States for generations.
Race is not a reliable substitute for immigration status, and immigration status cannot be inferred from a person’s appearance or surname.
Ruffalo’s phrase places “white people” and “non-immigrants” together, but those categories do not naturally form one clean statistical group.
Why Politicians Link Immigration and Crime
Crime is among the most emotionally powerful subjects in immigration politics.
A violent offense committed by an undocumented immigrant often receives intense national attention. Politicians cite the victim’s story as evidence of broader policy failure.