ArticleAmerican journal of preventive medicine2026
Mapping the Legal Landscape From 2000 to 2021: State Sanctuary and Antisanctuary Policies, Local Sanctuary Ordinances, and 287(g) Agreements.
Article in American journal of preventive medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- State sanctuary policies and the immigration enforcement activities across US counties: implications for population health.Health affairs scholar · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionIn recent years, states and localities have increasingly enacted sanctuary or antisanctuary laws to restrict or encourage, respectively, law enforcement cooperation with federal immigration enforcement. Such policies drive the magnitude of enforcement in a jurisdiction and may impact the health of immigrants and their communities. This article outlines the creation of a state and local sanctuary and antisanctuary policy data set to inform empirical research analyzing the impact of such policies.
methodsThe authors systematically searched state (2009-2021) and local (2000-2021) search engines collecting state antisanctuary, state sanctuary, city sanctuary, and city/county 287(g) policies; including documentation of state preemption of local policies. State policies were coded to identify provisions that are harmful or protective to immigrants and theoretically linked to health outcomes. Local policies were not coded owing to a lack of variation.
resultsBetween 2009 and 2021, 18 states enacted antisanctuary laws; 11 states and Washington, DC enacted sanctuary laws; 24 cities enacted sanctuary ordinances; and 176 localities (cities/counties) signed 287(g) agreements. State sanctuary and antisanctuary laws had some similar provisions but with opposing stances (e.g., requiring versus prohibiting compliance with detainer requests). Antisanctuary policies focused on punishment for noncompliance, whereas no state sanctuary policies included punitive measures.
conclusionsThis data set can inform future empirical research analyzing the impact of state and local immigration policies on health. This data set also sheds light on trends in immigration legislation, including punitive preemption, state government tendencies to enact laws that are ideologically opposed to the current administration, and conservative states using preemption to control progressive localities. Such trends demonstrate that the local policymaker role in the U.S. is changing. This change will impact health equity as localities may be discouraged or barred from enacting public health policies or may suffer financial penalties that deplete resources for public health programs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.