Nearly 11 million immigrants in the United States, three-quarters of which are Latino, lack legal authorization to live and work in the country; nonetheless, the majority of these individuals have resided in the U.S. for a decade or more and have profound social, emotional, cultural, and economic ties to the country (Passel & Cohn, 2018). Despite being deeply embedded in their communities, the dominant policy response involves increased immigration enforcement and advancing a hostile socio-political context (Gulasekaram & Ramakishnan, 2015). This policy approach comes at a great cost to immigrant and Latino communities throughout the U.S. and is largely ineffective. Accordingly, many advocates and stakeholders, including the National Association of Social Workers (2017), argue for policies that integrate “unauthorized permanent residents” (Martínez, Slack, & Martínez- Schuldt, 2018).

The primary purpose of this study was to understand strategies that can be leveraged to build support for integrationist policymaking. Among a sample of U.S.-born white college students (n=708), intensive, community, and college contact with Latino immigrants and people of color were assessed; the relationships between intergroup contact and support for integrationist policymaking were examined. To better understand the contact-policy attitudes relationship, the deprovincialization hypothesis of the intergroup contact theory (Pettigrew & Tropp, 2011) and the Latino threat narrative (Chavez, 2013) were merged and tested as a serial pathway by which contact and policy attitudes may be related.

Findings revealed intensive and community contact with Latino immigrants and people of color related to more support for integrationist legislation. In most cases, these effects were direct as well as indirect through the ethnocentrismthreat attitudes pathway. Ethnocentrism fully accounted for the relationships between intensive and community intergroup contact and threat attitudes. These findings have several implications for intervention. First, in the long-term struggle for immigrant integration, intergroup interaction between whites and people of color should be promoted, and the importance of casual intergroup contact should not be dismissed. Interventions that reduce social segregation are needed, as well as efforts to effectively harness the ethnic-racial diversity that presently exists. Cross-group exposure interventions that aim to overcome ethnocentric tendencies should be implemented.

Using integrated threat theory as the theoretical framework, this study examines the impact of perceived realistic threats (threats to welfare) and symbolic threats (threats to worldview) on anti-immigrant sentiment among a nationally representative sample in the U.S. Analysis of the antecedents of prejudice is particularly relevant today as anti-immigrant sentiment and hostile policies toward the population have risen in the past two decades. Perceived discrimination has also become salient within immigrant communities, negatively impacting both mental and physical health. Using logistic ordinal regressions with realistic threat, symbolic threat, and immigrant sentiment scales, this study found that both realistic and symbolic threats increased participants' likelihood of selecting a higher level of anti-immigrant sentiment, suggesting both are predictive of prejudice. However, symbolic threats emerged as a greater predictor of anti-immigrant sentiment, with an effect size over twice that of realistic threats. Implications for social work policy, practice, and future research are made.