> A total of 3 039 offenders were included in the analysis. A majority of them were immigrants (n = 1 800; 59.2%) of which a majority (n = 1 451; 47.7%) were born outside of Sweden.
How can you have an immigrant who was born inside of Sweden? They are no longer an immigrant then.
Not every country has jus soli/birthright citizenship. Sweden appears to be jus sanguinis/inherited citizenship only.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jus_soli
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jus_sanguinis
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish_nationality_law
> Swedish nationality law determines entitlement to Swedish citizenship. Citizenship of Sweden is based primarily on the principle of jus sanguinis. In other words, citizenship is conferred primarily by birth to a Swedish parent, irrespective of place of birth.
> In general, children born in Sweden to foreign parents do not acquire Swedish citizenship at birth, although if they remain resident in Sweden they may become citizens later on.
In the US, at least, there's a concept of the "generation" of an immigrant, and only the first generation would be born in a foreign country. So a second (and above) generation immigrant would not have migrated.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigrant_generations
Also, at least in US English, I feel the term "foreigner" seems less politically correct than "immigrant," and honestly think I've hardly ever heard any native speakers use it. I think they use immigrant or some more specific label (e.g. Canadian, European).
Nonnative speakers use "foreigner" a lot more frequently, and sometimes use it in weird ways (e.g. relative to their home country, so calling a native-born American a foreigner).