A record 33.7 million Hispanics of Mexican origin resided in the United States in 2012, according to an analysis of Census Bureau data by Pew Research Center. This estimate includes 11.4 million immigrants born in Mexico and 22.3 million born in the U.S. who self-identified as Hispanics of Mexican origin.

Mexicans are by far the largest Hispanic-origin population in the U.S., accounting for nearly two-thirds (64%) of the U.S. Hispanic population in 2012.¹ Hispanics of Mexican origin are also a significant portion of the U.S. population, accounting for 11% overall.

The size of the Mexican-origin population in the U.S. has risen dramatically over the past four decades as a result of one of the largest mass migrations in modern history. In 1970, fewer than 1 million Mexican immigrants lived in the U.S. By 2000, that number had grown to 9.8 million, and by 2007 it reached a peak of 12.5 million (Pew Hispanic Center, 2011). Since then, the Mexican-born population has declined as the arrival of new Mexican immigrants has slowed significantly (Passel et al., 2012). Today, 35% of Hispanics of Mexican origin were born in Mexico. And while the remaining two-thirds (65%) were born in the U.S., half (52%) of them have at least one immigrant parent.

Prior to the 1980s, most of the growth in the nation’s Mexican-origin population came from Hispanics of Mexican origin born in the U.S. However, since the 1980s—a decade after the current wave of Mexican migration took off—and up until 2000, more growth in the Mexican-origin population in the U.S. could be attributed to the arrival of Mexican immigrants. In the decade from 2000 to 2010, that pattern reversed—births surpassed immigration as the main driver of the dynamic growth in the U.S. Mexican-origin population (Pew Hispanic Center, 2011).

Mexican immigration has also played a large role in shaping the nation’s immigrant population. Today, 11.4 million Mexican immigrants live in the U.S., making them the single largest country of origin group by far among the nation’s 40 million immigrants. The next largest foreign-born population, from greater China at 2 million,² is less than one-fifth the size of the Mexican-born population in the U.S.

In addition, Mexican migration has shaped the nation’s unauthorized immigrant population. More than half (55%) of the 11.1 million immigrants who are in the country illegally are from Mexico.

Among Mexican immigrants, half (51%) are in the U.S. illegally while about a third are legal

permanent residents (32%) and 16% are naturalized U.S. citizens. Overall, naturalization rates among Mexican immigrants who are in the country legally are just half that of legal immigrants from all other countries combined (Gonzalez-Barrera et al., 2013).

Internationally, the U.S. is far and away the top destination for immigrants from Mexico. Fully 96% 0f Mexicans who leave Mexico migrate to the U.S. (Connor et al., 2012) Worldwide, 9% of people born in Mexico live in the U.S.³ In addition, the U.S. has more immigrants from Mexico alone than any other country has immigrants.⁴

Mexican Immigrants Today and Two Decades Ago

The characteristics of Mexican immigrants have changed over the decades. Compared with 1990, Mexican immigrants in 2011 were less likely to be male (53% vs. 55%), considerably older (median age of 38 vs. 29), better educated (41% with high school or more vs. 25%), and have been in the U.S. for longer (71% had been in the U.S. for more than 10 years, compared with 50%).

On economic measures, Mexican immigrants have mixed results. Although median personal earnings increased by about $2,000 during the last two decades, the median household income of Mexican immigrants suffered a drop of more than $4,500. This reflects the effects of the recent economic recession that drove up unemployment rates in the nation, particularly among Mexican immigrants.

This demographic portrait compares the demographic, income and economic characteristics of the foreign-born and native-born Mexican-origin populations with the characteristics of all Hispanics in the U.S. It is based on tabulations from the 2011 American Community Survey by the Pew Hispanic Center, a project of the Pew Research Center. Key findings include:

• Immigration status. Almost two-thirds of Mexicans in the U.S. are native born (65%). About two-thirds of immigrants from Mexico (65%) arrived in the U.S. in 1990 or later.
• Language. Two-thirds (66%) of Mexican-origin Hispanics ages 5 and older speak English proficiently.⁵ The remaining 34% report speaking English less than very well, equal to the share among all Hispanics. About nine-in-ten (89%) native-born Mexicans ages 5 and older speak English proficiently. This compares to about one-in-three (29%) among Mexican immigrants.
• Age. Mexican-origin Hispanics are younger than both the U.S. population and Hispanics overall. The median age of Mexicans is 25; the median ages of the U.S. population and all Hispanics are 37 and 27, respectively. U.S.-born Mexicans are considerably younger than their foreign-born counterparts. The median age of native-born Mexicans is 17, compared with 38 of the foreign born.
• Marital status. Among those ages 15 and older, Mexican immigrants are more likely than native-born Mexicans to be married—58% vs. 34% respectively. As a group, Mexican-origin Hispanics ages 15 and older are slightly more likely (45%) to be married than Hispanics overall (43%).
• Fertility. Almost one-in-ten (8%) Mexican women ages 15 to 44 gave birth in the 12 months prior to this survey. That was the same as the rate for all Hispanic women—8%—and slightly higher than the overall rate for U.S. women—6%. More than four-in-ten (45%) Mexican women ages 15 to 44 who gave birth in the 12 months prior to the survey were unmarried. That was similar to the rate for all Hispanic women—47%—and greater than the overall rate for U.S. women—38%.
• Regional dispersion. More than half (52%) of Mexican-origin Hispanics live in the West, mostly in California (36%), and another 35% live in the South, mostly in Texas (26%). There is no significant difference in the regional dispersion of Mexicans by nativity.
• Educational attainment. Mexicans have lower levels of education than the Hispanic population overall. Some 10% of Mexicans ages 25 and older—compared with 13% of all U.S. Hispanics—have obtained at least a bachelor’s degree. Mexicans born in the U.S. are almost three times more likely to have earned a bachelor’s degree than those born in Mexico—15% vs. 6% respectively. About six-in-ten Mexican immigrants have not earned a high school diploma (59%), compared with 21% of Mexicans born in the U.S.
• Income. The median annual personal earnings for Hispanics of Mexican origin ages 16 and older was $20,000 in the year prior to the survey, the same as for U.S. Hispanics overall. U.S.-born Mexicans had higher earnings than their immigrant counterparts—a median of $22,000 vs. $19,000 respectively.
• Poverty status. The share of Mexicans who live in poverty, 27%, is slightly higher than the rate for Hispanics overall (25%). U.S.-born Mexicans are slightly less likely to live in poverty than their foreign-born counterparts—26% vs. 29% respectively.
• Health insurance. One-third of Mexicans (33%) do not have health insurance, compared with 30% of all Hispanics. More than half (57%) of Mexican immigrants are uninsured, compared with 20% of those born in the U.S.
• Homeownership. The rate of homeownership (49%) among Mexican-origin Hispanics is higher than the rate for all Hispanics (46%). The rate of homeownership among U.S.-born Mexicans (53%) is higher than that of Mexican immigrants (45%).

About this Report

This report examines the Hispanic population of Mexican origin in the United States by its nativity. Several data sources were used to compile the statistics shown in this report. The data for the demographic portrait tables are derived from the 2011 American Community Survey (1% IPUMS), which provides detailed geographic, demographic and economic characteristics for each group. Historical trends for the Mexican-origin and Mexican foreign-born population are based on the U.S. Census Bureau’s Current Population Survey (CPS) March Annual Social and Economic Supplement conducted for 1995 to 2012 and U.S. censuses from 1850 to 2010. Estimates of the unauthorized population are based on augmented data from the March supplement of the CPS.

This report was written by Ana Gonzalez-Barrera, research associate, and Mark Hugo Lopez, associate director. Paul Taylor provided comments and editorial guidance. Jeffrey Passel provided guidance on the report’s statistical analysis. Anna Brown number-checked the report. Molly Rohal was the copy editor.

A Note on Terminology

The terms “Latino” and “Hispanic” are used interchangeably in this report.

“Native born” refers to persons who are U.S. citizens at birth, including those born in the United States, Puerto Rico or other U.S. territories and those born abroad to parents at least one of whom was a U.S. citizen.

“Foreign born” refers to persons born outside of the United States, Puerto Rico or other U.S. territories to parents neither of whom was a U.S. citizen.

The following terms are used to describe immigrants and their status in the U.S. In some cases, they differ from official government definitions because of limitations in the available survey data.

“Legal permanent resident,” “legal permanent resident alien,” “legal immigrant” and “authorized migrant” refer to a citizen of another country who has been granted a visa that allows work and permanent residence in the U.S. For the analyses in this report, legal permanent residents include persons admitted as refugees or granted asylum.

“Naturalized citizen” refers to a legal permanent resident who has fulfilled the length of stay and other requirements to become a U.S. citizen and who has taken the oath of citizenship.

“Unauthorized migrant” refers to a citizen of another country who lives in the U.S. without a currently valid visa.

“Eligible immigrant” in this report, refers to a legal permanent resident who meets the length of stay qualifications to file a petition to become a citizen but has not yet naturalized.

“Legal temporary migrant” refers to a citizen of another country who has been granted a temporary visa that may or may not allow work and temporary residence in the U.S.

The ACS is the largest household survey in the United States, with a sample of about 3 million addresses. It covers the topics previously covered in the long form of the decennial census. The ACS is designed to provide estimates of the size and characteristics of the resident population, which includes persons living in households and group quarters.

The specific data sources for this statistical profile are the 1% sample of the 2011 ACS Integrated Public Use Microdata Series (IPUMS) and the 5% sample of the 2000 Census IPUMS provided by the University of Minnesota.¹ The IPUMS assigns uniform codes, to the extent possible, to data collected by the decennial census and the ACS from 1850 to 2011. Due to differences in the way in which the IPUMS and Census Bureau adjust income data and assign poverty status, data provided in Tables 31 – 37 might differ from data on these variables that are provided by the Census Bureau. For more information about the IPUMS, including variable definition and sampling error, please visit http://usa.ipums.org/usa/design.shtml. To learn more about the sampling strategy and associated error of the 2000 Census or the 2011 American Community Survey, please refer to Chapter 8 of the U.S. Census Summary File 3: 2000 and U.S. Census Design Methodology, respectively.

For the purposes of this statistical portrait, the foreign born include those persons who identified as naturalized citizens or non-citizens and are living in the 50 states or the District of Columbia. Persons born in Puerto Rico and other outlying territories of the U.S. and who are now living in the 50 states or the District of Columbia are included in the native-born population.

Nearly half (45%) of the nation’s Hispanic¹ population lives in just 10 metropolitan areas, according to tabulations of the 2010 American Community Survey (ACS) by the Pew Hispanic Center, a project of the Pew Research Center.²

The Los Angeles-Long Beach, Calif., metropolitan area has the nation’s largest Hispanic population—5.7 million—and alone accounts for more than one-in-ten (11%) Hispanics nationally.³ All population estimates presented in this report are for Hispanics living in the 50 states and the District of Columbia.  The New York-Northeastern New Jersey metropolitan area is the second largest by Hispanic population (4.2 million) and is home to 8% of Hispanics nationwide.

Six of the 10 largest Hispanic metropolitan populations are in just two states. California has three–Los Angeles (#1), Riverside-San Bernardino (#4) and San Francisco-Oakland-Vallejo (#10). Texas is also home to three of the 10 largest Hispanic metropolitan areas—Houston-Brazoria (#3), Dallas-Fort Worth (#6) and San Antonio (#9). The other four largest Hispanic metropolitan populations are New York (#2); Chicago, Ill. (#5); Miami-Hialeah, Fla. (#7); and Phoenix, Ariz. (#8). Overall, each of the 10 largest Hispanic metropolitan areas has a Hispanic population of more than 1 million and Hispanics are the largest minority or ethnic group in each.

While these 10 metropolitan areas represent the largest Hispanic populations, within each area, the Hispanic share varies, as do the characteristics of the Hispanic population that resides in each area.

For example, the Hispanic share in each of the 10 largest metro area populations ranges from a low of 21% in Chicago to a high of 66% in Miami. Miami and San Antonio (55%) are the only two metro areas among the 10 largest where Hispanics are a majority of the population. Among the top 60, Hispanics are a majority in 11 additional metropolitan areas.

Overall, Los Angeles and New York have the largest Hispanic populations. In Los Angeles, Hispanics make up 45% of the area’s residents. In the New York metropolitan area, Hispanics make up about one-in-four (24%) of all residents.

Among the 60 metropolitan areas with the largest Latino populations, two have Latino population shares above 90%. The population of Laredo, Texas—with the 36th largest Latino population—is 96% Latino. The McAllen-Edinburg-Pharr-Mission, Texas, metropolitan area—which has the 13th largest Hispanic population—is 91% Latino.

The Hispanic origin composition in the top 60 metropolitan areas also varies. For example, Cubans are the largest Hispanic origin group in Miami and make up more than half (54%) of all Hispanics there. In the Washington, D.C./Maryland/Virginia, area—the 12th largest Hispanic metropolitan population—the largest Hispanic origin group is Salvadoran, making up 34% of the area’s Hispanic population. Puerto Ricans are the largest Hispanic origin group in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania/New Jersey—the 24th largest Hispanic metropolitan area—making up more than half (53%) of all Hispanics there.

Mexican-Americans are by far the nation’s largest Hispanic origin group, comprising 65% of the total Hispanic population in the United States. They are also the largest Hispanic origin group in 50 of the 60 metropolitan areas covered by this report, and make up more than half of the Hispanic population in 46 of them. In 33 of these metro areas Mexicans are not only the largest Hispanic origin group, they are also bigger than any other racial or ethnic group.

This report compares the 10 metropolitan areas with the largest Hispanic populations on a range of demographic and socioeconomic variables—including Hispanic origin, age, nativity, citizenship, education, English proficiency, household income, homeownership, poverty and health insurance.

Accompanying this report are statistical profiles for each of the 60 largest metropolitan areas by Hispanic population. Each statistical profile describes the demographic, employment and income characteristics of the Hispanic population in that metropolitan area, as well as the area’s non-Hispanic white and black populations. Also accompanying the report are two interactive maps showing key characteristics of the Hispanic population in each of the nation’s 60 largest metropolitan areas by Hispanic population and the distribution of the six largest Hispanic origin groups across the nation’s more than 3,000 counties.

About this Report

This report examines the Hispanic populations in the United States’ 10 metropolitan areas with the largest number of Hispanics. It also contains detailed information on the next 50 largest metropolitan areas by Hispanic population.

The data for this report are derived from the 2010 American Community Survey (1% IPUMS), which provides detailed geographic, demographic and economic characteristics for each group.

Accompanying this report are statistical profiles of the 60 largest metropolitan areas by Hispanic population. Each statistical profile describes the demographic and economic characteristics of the Hispanic, non-Hispanic white and non-Hispanic black populations in that metropolitan area.

Also accompanying the report are two interactive maps. The first shows key characteristics of the Hispanic population in each of the nation’s 60 largest Hispanic metropolitan areas. The interactive also shows the largest Hispanic metropolitan populations and shares for the six largest Hispanic origin groups—Mexicans, Puerto Ricans, Salvadorans, Cubans, Dominicans and Guatemalans. The second interactive map shows the distribution of the six largest Hispanic origin groups across the nation’s more than 3,000 counties.

About the Authors

Seth Motel is a research assistant at the Pew Hispanic Center. Motel earned his B.A. in political science from Brown University.

Eileen Patten is a research assistant at the Pew Hispanic Center. Patten earned her B.A. in sociology and English from the University of Michigan.

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Paul Taylor and Mark Hugo Lopez for editorial guidance. Lopez and Rakesh Kochhar provided comments on earlier drafts of this report. Lopez checked numbers in the report. Molly Rohal was the copy editor.

How to use this map: Use the + button or double-click to zoom in. Use the – button to zoom out. Zoom in for county level data, zoom out for state data. To navigate to areas not currently in view, click and drag inside the map

REPORT: The 10 Largest Hispanic Origin Groups: Characteristics, Rankings, Top Counties

Among the 50.7 million Hispanics in the United States, nearly two-thirds (65%), or 33 million, self-identify as being of Mexican origin, according to tabulations of the 2010 American Community Survey (ACS) by the Pew Hispanic Center, a project of the Pew Research Center. No other Hispanic subgroup rivals the size of the Mexican-origin population. Puerto Ricans, the nation’s second largest Hispanic origin group, make up just 9% of the total Hispanic population in the 50 states and the District of Columbia.¹

Overall, the 10 largest Hispanic origin groups—Mexicans, Puerto Ricans, Cubans, Salvadorans, Dominicans, Guatemalans, Colombians, Hondurans, Ecuadorians and Peruvians—make up 92% of the U.S. Hispanic population.² Six Hispanic origin groups have populations greater than 1 million.

Hispanic origin groups differ from each other in a number of ways. For instance, U.S. Hispanics of Mexican origin have the lowest median age, at 25 years, while Hispanics of Cuban origin have the highest median age, at 40 years. Colombians are the most likely to have a college degree (32%) while Salvadorans are the least likely (7%). Ecuadorians have the highest annual median household income ($50,000) while Dominicans have the lowest ($34,000). Half of Hondurans do not have health insurance—the highest share among Hispanic origin groups. By contrast, just 15% of Puerto Ricans do not have health insurance.

Top Regions and Counties

Hispanic subgroups also differ in their states, regions and counties of geographic concentration. Mexicans, Salvadorans and Guatemalans are largely concentrated in western states, while Cubans, Colombians, Hondurans and Peruvians are largely concentrated in the South. The largest numbers of Puerto Ricans, Dominicans and Ecuadorians are in the Northeast.

The nation’s Cuban population is the most concentrated. Nearly half (48%) live in one county—Miami-Dade County in Florida. Miami-Dade County is also home to the nation’s largest Colombian, Honduran and Peruvian communities.

For Mexicans, Salvadorans and Guatemalans, Los Angeles County in California contains each group’s largest community. Los Angeles County alone contains 9% of the nation’s Hispanic population. Bronx County in New York contains the largest Puerto Rican and Dominican populations. And Queens County in New York contains the largest Ecuadorian population.

Changes since 2000

This report also includes an analysis of changes in the characteristics of the 10 largest Hispanic origin groups from 2000 to 2010.

During the decade, the foreign-born share of each major Hispanic origin group declined. Among all Hispanics, the share foreign born fell from 40% in 2000 to 37% in 2010. Meanwhile the share holding U.S. citizenship increased from 71% in 2000 to 74% in 2010. Among all foreign-born Hispanics, the share holding U.S. citizenship increased from 28% in 2000 to 29% in 2010.

Hispanics have made gains in terms of their educational attainment during the decade. In each of the 10 groups, the share ages 25 and older with a college degree increased. Among all Hispanics, the share with a college degree increased from 10% in 2000 to 13% in 2010.

However, most Hispanic origin groups had lower median household incomes in 2010 than in 2000 (adjusted to 2010 dollars). Overall, median household income among Hispanics fell from $43,100 in 2000 to $40,000 in 2010—a decrease of 7%. And the share living in poverty increased two percentage points, from 23% in 2000 to 25% in 2010.³ Among all U.S. households, median household income (in 2010 dollars) fell from $54,200 in 2000 to $49,800 in 2010—a drop of $4,400 or 8%.⁴ The poverty rate for all Americans increased by three percentage points over the same period.

Hispanics are the nation’s largest minority group, representing 16.4% of the U.S. population. By comparison, non-Hispanic blacks, who are the nation’s second largest minority group, represent 12.3% of the nation’s population and non-Hispanic Asians rank third at 4.7%.⁵

Hispanics are also the nation’s largest immigrant group and one of its fastest growing populations. According to the Census Bureau, Hispanic population growth between 2000 and 2010 accounted for more than half of the nation’s population growth (Passel, Cohn and Lopez, 2011). Among the nation’s 40 million immigrants, nearly half (47%) are Hispanic (Pew Hispanic Center, 2012).

2011). Among the nation’s 40 million immigrants, nearly half (47%) are Hispanic (Pew Hispanic Center, 2012).

This report compares the 10 largest Hispanic origin groups in the U.S. on several characteristics. In addition, accompanying this report are 10 statistical profiles—one for each Hispanic origin group. Each statistical profile describes the demographic, employment and income characteristics of a Hispanic origin population residing in the 50 states and the District of Columbia. The characteristics of an origin group are also compared with all Hispanics and the U.S. population overall.

This report uses data from the 2010 American Community Survey (ACS), the 2010 U.S. Census and the 2000 U.S. Census (5% IPUMS). The accompanying Hispanic origin profiles use data from the 2010 ACS.

Rankings, 2010

Among the 50.7 million Hispanics in the United States, nearly two-thirds (65%), or 33 million, self-identify as being of Mexican origin. No other Hispanic subgroup rivals the size of the Mexican-origin population. Puerto Ricans, the nation’s second largest Hispanic origin group, make up just 9% of the total Hispanic population in the 50 states and the District of Columbia. Overall, the 10 largest Hispanic origin groups—Mexicans, Puerto Ricans, Cubans, Salvadorans, Dominicans, Guatemalans, Colombians, Hondurans, Ecuadorians and Peruvians—make up 92% of the U.S. Hispanic population. Six Hispanic origin groups have populations greater than 1 million.

There are differences across these ten population groups in the share of each that is foreign born, holds citizenship (by birth or naturalization) and is proficient in English. They are also of varying age, tend to live in different areas within the U.S. and have varying levels of education, homeownership, income and poverty.

The characteristics of the largest Hispanic origin groups in the U.S. are explored in the report “The 10 Largest Hispanic Origin Groups: Characteristics, Rankings, Top Counties” and in 10 statistical profiles, one for each Hispanic origin group. Hispanic origin is based on self-described family ancestry or place of birth in response to questions in the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey. It is not necessarily the same as place of birth. For example, a person born in Los Angeles may identify his or her origin as Mexico. Likewise, some people born in Mexico may identify another country as their origin depending on the place of birth of their ancestors.

Each statistical profile describes the demographic, employment and income characteristics of a Hispanic origin population residing in the 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia. The characteristics of an origin group are also compared with all Hispanics and the U.S. population overall. The profiles use data from the 2010 American Community Survey.

The May 3 update includes the full methodology appendix and a statistical profile of Mexican immigrants in the United States.

The largest wave of immigration in history from a single country to the United States has come to a standstill. After four decades that brought 12 million current immigrants—most of whom came illegally—the net migration flow from Mexico to the United States has stopped and may have reversed, according to a new analysis of government data from both countries by the Pew Hispanic Center, a project of the Pew Research Center.

The standstill appears to be the result of many factors, including the weakened U.S. job and housing construction markets, heightened border enforcement, a rise in deportations, the growing dangers associated with illegal border crossings, the long-term decline in Mexico’s birth rates and broader economic conditions in Mexico.

It is possible that the Mexican immigration wave will resume as the U.S. economy recovers. Even if it doesn’t, it has already secured a place in the record books. The U.S. today has more immigrants from Mexico alone—12.0 million—than any other country in the world has from all countries of the world.¹ Some 30% of all current U.S. immigrants were born in Mexico. The next largest sending country—China (including Hong Kong and Taiwan)—accounts for just 5% of the nation’s current stock of about 40 million immigrants.

Looking back over the entire span of U.S. history, no country has ever seen as many of its people immigrate to this country as Mexico has in the past four decades. However, when measured not in absolute numbers but as a share of the immigrant population at the time, immigration waves from Germany and Ireland in the late 19th century equaled or exceeded the modern wave from Mexico.

Beyond its size, the most distinctive feature of the modern Mexican wave has been the unprecedented share of immigrants who have come to the U.S. illegally. Just over half (51%) of all current Mexican immigrants are unauthorized, and some 58% of the estimated 11.2 million unauthorized immigrants in the U.S. are Mexican (Passel and Cohn, 2011).

The sharp downward trend in net migration from Mexico began about five years ago and has led to the first significant decrease in at least two decades in the unauthorized Mexican population. As of 2011, some 6.1 million unauthorized Mexican immigrants were living in the U.S., down from a peak of nearly 7 million in 2007, according to Pew Hispanic Center estimates based on data from the U.S. Census Bureau. Over the same period, the population of authorized immigrants from Mexico rose modestly, from 5.6 million in 2007 to 5.8 million in 2011.

The net standstill in Mexican-U.S. migration flows is the result of two opposite trend lines that have converged in recent years. During the five-year period from 2005 to 2010, a total of 1.4 million Mexicans immigrated to the United States, down by more than half from the 3 million who had done so in the five-year period of 1995 to 2000. Meantime, the number of Mexicans and their children who moved from the U.S. to Mexico between 2005 and 2010 rose to 1.4 million, roughly double the number who had done so in the five-year period a decade before. While it is not possible to say so with certainty, the trend lines within this latest five-year period suggest that return flow to Mexico probably exceeded the inflow from Mexico during the past year or two.

Of the 1.4 million people who migrated from the U.S. to Mexico since 2005, including about 300,000 U.S.-born children, most did so voluntarily, but a significant minority were deported and remained in Mexico. Firm data on this phenomenon are sketchy, but Pew Hispanic Center estimates based on government data from both countries suggest that 5% to 35% of these returnees may not have moved voluntarily.

In contrast to the decrease of the Mexican born, the U.S. immigrant population from all countries has continued to grow and numbered 39.6 million in 2011, according to the Census Bureau’s Current Population Survey.

In addition, the number of Mexican-Americans in the U.S.—both immigrants and U.S.-born residents of Mexican ancestry—is continuing to rise. The Mexican-American population numbered 33 million in 2010.² As reported previously (Pew Hispanic Center, 2011), between 2000 and 2010 births surpassed immigration as the main reason for growth of the Mexican-American population.

The population of Mexican-born residents of the U.S. is larger than the population of most countries or states. Among Mexican-born people worldwide, one-in-ten lives in the United States.

This report has five additional sections. The next section analyzes statistics on migration between Mexico and the United States from data sources in both countries. The third uses mainly Mexican data to examine characteristics, experience and future intentions of Mexican migrants handed over to Mexican authorities by U.S. law enforcement agencies. The fourth, based on U.S. data, examines trends in border enforcement statistics. The fifth looks at changing conditions in Mexico that might affect migration trends. The report’s last section looks at characteristics of Mexican-born immigrants in the U.S., using U.S. Census Bureau data. The appendix explains the report’s methodology and data sources.

Among the report’s other main findings from these sections:

Changing Patterns of Border Enforcement

• In spite of (and perhaps because of) increases in the number of U.S. Border Patrol agents, apprehensions of Mexicans trying to cross the border illegally have plummeted in recent years—from more than 1 million in 2005 to 286,000 in 2011—a likely indication that fewer unauthorized migrants are trying to cross. Border Patrol apprehensions of all unauthorized immigrants are now at their lowest level since 1971.
• As apprehensions at the border have declined, deportations of unauthorized Mexican immigrants–some of them picked up at work sites or after being arrested for other criminal violations–have risen to record levels. In 2010, 282,000 unauthorized Mexican immigrants were repatriated by U.S. authorities, via deportation or the expedited removal process.

Changing Characteristics of Return Migrants

• Although most unauthorized Mexican immigrants sent home by U.S. authorities say they plan to try to return, a growing share say they will not try to come back to the U.S. According to a survey by Mexican authorities of repatriated immigrants, 20% of labor migrants in 2010 said they would not return, compared with just 7% in 2005.
• A growing share of unauthorized Mexican immigrants sent home by U.S. authorities had been in the United States for a year or more—27% in 2010, up from 6% in 2005. Also, 17% were apprehended at work or at home in 2010, compared with just 3% in 2005.

Demographic Trends Related to Mexican Migration

• In Mexico, among the wide array of trends with potential impact on the decision to emigrate, the most significant demographic change is falling fertility: As of 2009, a typical Mexican woman was projected to have an average 2.4 children in her lifetime, compared with 7.3 for her 1960 counterpart.
• Compared with other immigrants to the U.S., Mexican-born immigrants are younger, poorer, less-educated, less likely to be fluent in English and less likely to be naturalized citizens.

The ACS is the largest household survey in the United States, with a sample of about 3 million addresses. It covers the topics previously covered in the long form of the decennial census. The ACS is designed to provide estimates of the size and characteristics of the resident population, which includes persons living in households and group quarters.

The specific data sources for this statistical profile are the 1% sample of the 2010 ACS Integrated Public Use Microdata Series (IPUMS) and the 5% sample of the 2000 Census IPUMS provided by the University of Minnesota.¹ The IPUMS assigns uniform codes, to the extent possible, to data collected by the decennial census and the ACS from 1850 to 2010. Due to differences in the way in which the IPUMS and Census Bureau adjust income data and assign poverty status, data provided in Tables 27 – 37 might differ from data on these variables that are provided by the Census Bureau. For more information about the IPUMS, including variable definition and sampling error, please visit http://usa.ipums.org/usa/design.shtml. To learn more about the sampling strategy and associated error of the 2000 Census or the 2010 American Community Survey, please refer to Chapter 8 of the U.S. Census Summary File 3: 2000 and U.S. Census Design Methodology, respectively.

For the purposes of this statistical portrait, the foreign born include those persons who identified as naturalized citizens or non-citizens. Persons born in Puerto Rico and other outlying territories of the U.S. are included in the native-born population.

According to the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (ACS), the U.S. population in 2010 included 39.9 million foreign-born residents. This estimate, the latest available for the foreign-born population, is 1.5 million, or 4%, higher than the survey’s 38.5 million estimate in 2009.¹ A variety of additional data, however, suggest that both the absolute increase and the percentage increase in the foreign-born population were substantially smaller. An analysis by the Pew Hispanic Center, a project of the Pew Research Center, concludes that the growth in the foreign-born population from 2009 to 2010 is a markedly lower 616,000, or 1.6% (see Table 1).

The Pew Hispanic Center revision to the estimated growth in the foreign-born population was undertaken to account for changes between 2009 and 2010 in the Census Bureau’s assumptions about population composition that underlie the reported ACS estimates. This type of discontinuity in assumptions is not uncommon in government datasets, and government agencies often supply guidance to users on dealing with the issue. Pew Hispanic’s revised estimate smoothes out these discontinuities by employing the Census Bureau’s own revised and consistent set of underlying population estimates.

When the ACS data for 2009 are revised for consistency with the assumptions that underlie the 2010 ACS, the foreign-born population in 2009 is estimated to have been 39.3 million, 850,000 higher than the original ACS estimate. As a result, the growth in the foreign-born population from 2009 to 2010 is estimated to be less than originally reported (Table 1).

To appreciate the reasons for the gap between the estimates reported by the Census Bureau and the revisions produced by the Pew Hispanic Center, it helps to understand how the government agency collects and processes statistics. The 2010 ACS is based on the latest information from the 2010 Decennial Census; the 2009 ACS is based on the latest information available for that survey—updates of the 2000 Decennial Census. This report discusses how the difference in underlying data can affect estimates of the change in population from 2009 to 2010. A methodological section explains how the ACS estimates for 2009 are revised to make them consistent with the 2010 data. The analysis in this report is intended to clarify the extent to which the apparent change in the foreign-born population from 2009 to 2010 stems from inconsistencies in the underlying population estimates.²

Additional Data Show Similar Pattern

Additional data from other sources indicate that the Pew Hispanic revised estimate of the growth of the foreign-born population is more accurate than implied by the reported ACS data. For example, similar data from the Current Population Survey (CPS), a monthly household survey conducted by the Census Bureau, show a drop in average annual change in the foreign-born population over the decade—from 880,000 per year for 2000-2006 to 510,000 per year for 2006-2010.³ These CPS data have been reweighted by the Pew Hispanic Center to produce a consistent dataset and adjusted to correct for undercount.

Unpublished analysis by the Pew Hispanic Center of ACS data on respondents’ year of immigration and residence one year ago show a decrease in arrivals of immigrants in 2009 compared with earlier in the decade. Additionally, other sources (e.g., National Research Council, 2011; U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 2011) also point to a slowdown of immigration flows, especially those of unauthorized migrants, associated with the onset of the Great Recession in late 2007.

Survey Changes Throughout the Decade

The need for revision of the 2009 ACS estimates stems from the fact that the ACS samples the U.S. population; unlike the decennial census, it does not count the entire population. Therefore, its basic population totals—for the country, states and smaller geographic areas, subdivided by age, gender, race and other characteristics—are imposed from other sources. ACS respondents are assigned sample weights that total to these pre-specified population numbers.

However, population estimates from the 2009 ACS and the 2010 ACS are “mismatched.” Sample weights in the 2009 ACS are based on a postcensal population estimate for 2009 that the Census Bureau derived by updating the 2000 Census using government records for births, deaths, immigration and migration (see Terminology). Sample weights in the 2010 ACS are based on an estimate for July 1, 2010, that is derived from the 2010 Census population count.

In other words, the 2009 ACS estimates are based on data tied to the 2000 Census and do not reflect the latest information on the size and the characteristics of the U.S. population as determined by the 2010 Census, a more relevant year.

Inconsistencies between the decennial census population counts and the population estimates during the previous decade are nothing new. However, until this decade, this discontinuity did not affect detailed data about the characteristics of the U.S. population, such as the number who are foreign born, because such data at the state and local level came only once a decade from the decennial census itself, via the long form that was mailed to a sample of the nation’s population. But the long form was last used in the 2000 Census. Since 2005, such data now come every year from the ACS, a long-form survey that includes data from more than 2 million households per year.

Discrepancies in Data for Some Groups

Although the 2010 Census national and state counts agreed very closely with the expected total based on the Bureau’s postcensal population estimates for 2010 (Cohn, 2011), there were notable discrepancies for some subgroups—especially those that are prominent in the foreign-born population. This suggests there are similar issues with the 2009 postcensal population estimates that were the basis for the 2009 ACS.

According to an earlier Pew Hispanic analysis, the 2010 Census counted nearly 1 million more Hispanics than would be expected (Passel and Cohn, 2011), or 1.9% more than expected, based on the postcensal population estimates for 2010. The count of non-Hispanic single-race Asians also was higher than would be expected—by about 700,000, or 5%.⁴ These groups account for almost three-quarters of immigrants. Thus, because the 2009 ACS total for the foreign-born population is derived from the same series of postcensal population estimates, it also can be considered to be an underestimate.

To account for differences between the postcensal estimates used to weight the 2009 ACS and the 2010 Census-based data used to weight the 2010 ACS, the Pew Hispanic Center adjusted the 2009 ACS to agree with the Census Bureau’s recently published new intercensal estimates for 2000 to 2010 (see Terminology and the methodological appendix). These estimates “smooth the transition from one decennial census count to the next” (U.S. Census Bureau, 2011a) by adjusting the published postcensal estimates for each year so the trend is in line with the 2010 Census results. The Census Bureau does this by distributing throughout the decade any discontinuities between those estimates and population counts in the 2010 Census (i.e., the error of closure, see Terminology). The biggest differences between the reported and revised ACS estimates for 2009 are for young adult Asians and Hispanics.⁵

It is not unusual to see discontinuities attributable to changes in weighting or population counts in government data series. Every January, for example, new population estimates are introduced into the Current Population Survey, leading to discontinuities in estimates of the labor force and the number of employed and unemployed workers. The government agencies involved typically provide users with guidance on the impact of the changes (e.g., Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2011), but they often do not revise previously released data. Only rarely does the Census Bureau issue a new set of survey weights that would enable data users to re-estimate time series and detailed measures.⁶

Revisions to ACS Weights

The adjustments to the 2009 ACS data are based on sample weights revised by the Pew Hispanic Center that are derived from intercensal population estimates for 2009. The originally reported 2009 ACS data are based on sample weights derived from the postcensal estimates for 2009. The revised weights are derived using a simplified version of the final stages of the ACS weighting procedure. (See the methodological appendix for more details of the revised weighting procedures.) As such, they should be considered approximations to full revisions that would incorporate new information from the 2010 Census into the full ACS weighting methods for 2009.

The estimate of the size of the foreign-born population is created by summing the revised survey weights of ACS respondents who say they are foreign born. This method is similar to that used by the Census Bureau to arrive at its estimate, except for the difference in the survey weights.

Analysis of changes in the foreign-born population throughout the 2000-2010 decade will require consistent data for years other than 2010, 2009 and 2000. These 2009 revisions are a first step in producing a consistent time series of ACS data for the decade. The Pew Hispanic Center plans to produce revised weights for ACS public use files for 2005 through 2008. These data will enable users to compare actual and apparent change for those years.⁷