Most people know the Arizona immigration law lets the police stop drivers they suspect are illegal immigrants—it is also part of a political movement to deport 11 million people. This is not a sensible immigration reform. Real stories help illustrate why more repressive laws won’t work, the Saturday’s New York Times had two good ones.
First story—a Georgia college student whose parents brought her to the United States illegally when she was 11 years old, stopped on a minor traffic violation, no underlying crimes, weeks away from college graduation was automatically deported. Fortunately, her university’s president and others intervened after outraged public response so her case is being reviewed in a discretionary bureaucratic proceeding. The current law provides for review, but no way for her to get citizenship, so we’re going to automatically deport someone who wasn’t responsible for coming here, is getting a college education, and sounds from the story like she would be a great citizen.
Think its OK to deport her, and not have any mechanism to allow her to obtain citizenship? Is that a rational immigration policy?
OK, let’s go to another Times story. A German theology student writing a Ph.D. dissertation, married to a U.S. citizen, has a green card, obeys all of the rules, had an unnoticed flaw in his paperwork when he filed entry visas years ago, followed the advice of U.S. immigration authorities, who uncovered the paperwork flaw. You guessed it—deportation, bar on entering U.S. for 10 years, too bad about his marriage to a citizen, no rights to a hearing or any due process. Again, huge outcry ensues, lawyers involved, case is now under review by those beloved bureaucrats that Tea Partiers want to empower even further.
Our immigration system is already screwed up, and these two cases show what would happen if it became even harsher. The presumption of deportation and restricting of rights has been going on for years, driven by hysteria about illegal immigrants. There is no path to citizenship for deserving people, and it leaves all power in the hands of a dysfunctional and unaccountable bureaucracy. Arizona’s laws and the calls to deport 11 million people will simply strengthen the hand of these bureaucrats and further erode due process and all of our rights.
We need comprehensive legal immigration reform. The Center for American Progress has a good outline of what it should look like.
First, people in the country illegally need a way to resolve their status, including paying all taxes, being screened for criminal activity, and proving they are good candidates for citizenship.
Second, reasons for legal immigration must be clarified, focusing more on economic benefits from immigrants while protecting the interests of U.S. workers.
Third, the path to citizenship should include language and civic education programs that bring immigrants closer to core American values and identity.
And finally, there must be effective enforcement of laws, but not in isolation from these other principles.
Please know that I think nation states need to have borders and rules about immigration. And those rules need to be obeyed, but ours need to be changed for practical, economic, and moral reasons.
Sadly, the hysteria of immigration opponents is actually scaring politicians from taking any rational action on immigration. And that harms not only immigrants, most of whom would be valuable citizens and neighbors, but all of us.
6 Responses to Our Nutty Immigration Laws
luther_blissett - May 18, 2010 at 9:23 am
Teresa, you write, “Most people know the Arizona immigration law lets the police stop drivers they suspect are illegal immigrants.”I don’t believe that’s an accurate interpretation of the law. My understanding is that the police can only ask for proof of citizenship after they’ve pulled over drivers for some other legitimate legal reason.
edwardjkennedy - May 18, 2010 at 9:33 am
Teresa, Things go wrong sometimes under most laws. That does not mean we should not have them or enforce them; Arizona is chosing to enforce. Presumably the Georgia college student was old enough to know they were here illegally. They should have done something proactively to change their status. Are you sure the stories you are sharing are the whole story and not selective info published by teh Times?
livefreeordie2 - May 18, 2010 at 1:26 pm
Luther_blisset #1 – She knows that already. This is her second bite at the illegal alien issue and she has clearly chosen to repeat what she, like Obama and Holder, knows to be absolute nonsense. Well, I suppose Holder has an excuse because even though he made pointed, specific criticisms of the law, he never bothered to read it. Ooops. I have little doubt that Ghilarducci has never bothered to read it either. And that’s being kind, because if she had read it, then either a. she was incapable of comprehending the words or b. she is simply lying.As for the poor little student from Georgia, it’s true that her parents brought her to the US when she was 10. That was her parent’s lack of ethics. She apparently learned quite well, however, since she lied to KSU about the fact that she was an out-of-state student. In other words, she stole roughly $6000 in tuition a year by lying. She’s a thief as well as an illegal and should be deported right after she pays KSU what she owes.As for the immigration system, there’s no doubt that it needs reform – it does seem that INS goes out of its way to harass and penalize those who try to play by the rules while ignoring so many who do not. But the two articles point out the differences that the majority of Americans clearly understand. The German Theology student and his American wife were trying to follow the rules. The KSU student clearly had no intention of following any rules. I wish Ghilarducci would tell us what the immigration laws are like in the PRC (home, one could imagine, to her ideas about Economics)? How about in the various European nations? How about in Mexico? Name for me the country where millions of illegals are tolerated. Bottom line. As with all libs, this article is a subtle attempt to conflate the idiotic problems with our immigration system with our porous border and all the illegals that pour through. Two different problems. We need to close the borders, deport illegals, and fix what’s broken in INS so that we can continue to welcome as many immigrants as possible.
mercy_otis_warren - May 18, 2010 at 2:10 pm
Yes, Ms. Ghilarducci, the Georgia student “sounds from the story like she would be a great citizen”–that is, if you disregard the fact that she was driving a car without a license, gave a false address to the police, and knew she was ineligible for in-state tuition but took the financial benefit anyway. Regardless of one’s degree of sympathy with her or any other illegal immigrant (I agree with livefreeordie2 that the second case is quite different–the couple there tried to be fastidious in filing the correct paperwork and following the rules, while no evidence is given that the first girl ever did so), I don’t quite see why the two cited stories are evidence in themselves that “more repressive laws won’t work.” One might say that our inability to control the borders is evidence of that, but what have these two accounts supposedly persuaded me about the *inefficacy* (rather than the desirability or morality) of deporting those discovered to be here illegally? “And it leaves all power in the hands of a dysfunctional and unaccountable bureaucracy.”Of course, the government bureaucracy in charge of administering the health-care reform for which you argued so stridently will be *much* more functional and accountable than the INS, right?
vitafidens - May 28, 2010 at 6:51 pm
I was going to make a comment on the blatant and obvious misstatement of AZ’s immitgration law, but I must say that you, Luther and Livefree have already stated quite eloquently what I wanted to say. I am sick and tied of whining liberals complaining about AZ’s immigration law when they either have not read it, or fail to understand it for what it is. There is a reason that one hears the term “Libtard” spoken more and more frequently these days. Namely because more often than not, statements made by such people are nothing more than ignorant, pipe dream utopian idealism at its finest. Let me expand upon that Teresa. Not only did you blatantly misquote the AZ immigration law, but you showed that you’ve no idea what the hell you’re talking about in the first place. And then you go on and perpetrate yet another libtard standard practice of giving half truths and outright lies to “back up” your belief system, knowing FULL WELL that if the entire story is told, your supposed point is nullified (I’m speaking about the Georgia college thief/liar that you made such a sob story over). Allow me to let you in on a little secret: The new law enacted by AZ is no different than the law that is already on the books under Federal USC statutes. Furthermore, I would advise you to look at CA Penal Code section 834B. Since I doubt you’ll take the time to actually read that one either, I’ll paraphrase it for you quickly: Every law enforcement agency in California SHALL, upon suspiscion that a person WHO HAS BEEN LAWFULLY CONTACTED is in the state illegally attempt to VERIFY the status of said individual’s immigration status and hand said person over to ICE. Now, had you read AZ’s law, there would be a couple of points about that which would have jumped out at you. Namely that CA’s PC 834B predates AZ’s new law by decades AND that the CA state law essentially states the same thing, for the same reasons. The AZ law is not some new, racist enaction of any draconian law. Rather, it is a states attempt to enforce a law ALREADY on the books under Federal law which the Feds have continually failed to enforce. Interestingly enough, we have a history here in this nation (a Constitutionally protected history I might add) of a State taking action of its own accord when the Federal gov’t fails to act. AZ is simply continuing that tradition. But that is beside the point. The purpose of this comment is to point out how, yet again, a lefty like you feels the need to pontificate on a matter of which you have little or no understanding of. I would suggest, Teresa that if you wish to continue with your blabbering on about a “repressive” law of which you have no understanding, I would urge you to add the “repressive” California law to your litany of offenses perpetrated against individuals who are in this country ILLEGALLY. I am so done with you liberal hacks.
11250382 - June 11, 2010 at 11:04 am
The US immigration law calls for people to be stopped. The law in Arizona merely mirrors what our federal law says. It is unfortuante when a state has to pass a law because the federal government is not doing its job. I know more than a few “visitors” who always carry their documentation in case they are stopped. They are not black, they are not Mexican, they are not middle eastern, they “look like” any typical American. When you are stopped for speeding or at a regular “vehicle check,” you have to show your driver’s license – what is the big deal to expect the same of everyone. Try entering Mexico illegally – in Calderon’s own words “they are sent home.” Please – enough alaready.