Examining what we call "crimmigrating narratives," we show that US immigration court criminalizes non-citizens, cements forms of social control, and dispenses punishment in a non-punitive legal setting. Building on theories of crimmigration and a sociology of narrative, we code, categorize, and describe third-party observations of detained immigration court hearings conducted in Fort Snelling, Minnesota, from July 2018 to June 2019. We identify and investigate structural factors of three key crimmigrating narratives in the courtroom: one based on threats (stories of the non-citizen's criminal history and perceived danger to society), a second involving deservingness (stories of the non-citizen's social ties, hardship, and belonging in the United States), and a third pertaining to their status as "impossible subjects" (stories rendering non-citizens "illegal," categorically excludable, and contradictory to the law). Findings demonstrate that the courts' prioritization of these three narratives disconnects detainees from their own socially organized experience and prevents them from fully engaging in the immigration court process. In closing, we discuss the potential implications of crimmigrating narratives for the US immigration legal system and non-citizen status.

The implementation of criminal law involves formal law enforcement, education and public outreach aimed at preventing criminal activity, and providing services for victims. Historically, quantitative research on global trends has tended to focus on a single policy dimension, potentially masking the unique factors that affect the diffusion of each policy dimension independently. Using an ordered-probit model to analyze new human trafficking policy data on national prosecution, prevention, and victim-protection efforts, we find that global ties and domestic interest groups matter more in areas where international law is less defined. While prosecution, officially mandated by the Trafficking Protocol, was relatively impervious to global ties and domestic interest groups, both trafficking prevention and victim protection were associated with these factors. Our findings also suggest that fear of repercussions is not a major driver of state actions to combat trafficking-neither ratification of the Trafficking Protocol nor levels of United States aid were associated with greater implementation of anti-trafficking measures.

Visual data are transforming the documentation of activities across many legal domains. Visual data can incriminate or exonerate; they can shape and reshape public opinion. Visual evidence can legitimize certain accounts of events while calling others into question. The proliferation of visual data creates challenges for the law at multiple points of entry: recording, distribution or disclosure, redaction or deletion, or use as evidence. This symposium outlines and analyzes legal challenges posed by recent developments in visual data technologies and practices. This introductory essay and the articles that follow highlight legal issues that arise when state actors collect visual data and when visual data are used in legal disputes. Technological development is outpacing empirical research on, and legal regulation of, visual data within society and inside the courtroom. This symposium provides a much-needed opportunity to highlight new legal and empirical research at the intersection of visual data and law.