Replies

“Many of those who are now in the “illegal” category would make it to the “legal” lineup?”

Absolutely not. Compromising on amnesty is NOT an option. Deciding who is here and then offering them “aspirations of citizenship” is UNACCEPTABLE.

If you are speaking of the current immigration situation, I agree. However you used the past tense with your word “came”, which is inaccurate. I was born in California from a 4th generation California family of Dutch ethnicity on my mothers side. On my father’s families side my Great Aunt was a D.A.R. immigrant., so I must assume we immigrated prior to the evolvement of the United States from the colonies. My father (according to my California State birth certificate) and his father, however were born in Canada, and therefore, Canadian citizens. You must be aware there was a great nomadic movement between Canada and the United States which was in essence undocumented during the earlier centuries prior to 1900. Since the time of the Viet Nam war era, the U.S. Immigration Service, in conjunction with the Department of State has been issuing certificates of loss of nationality to U.S. born citizens for maintaining (as in my case) dual nationality acquired by birth. AND at the border between Canada and the U.S., have been denying entry to such persons as myself, into the U.S. (the land of our birth).
This amounts to Banishment which has been ruled illegal by the U.S. Supreme Court. When you say immigration is not a black and white issue, or rather with black and white explanations, I respect your right to an opinion, however when ruled upon by the U.S. Supreme Court, and written about by the U.S. Attorney General in his response to the Supreme Court case entitled Costello vs. I.N.S., which requires a judicial review for contested loss of citizenship or deportation; rather than an administrative review by some clerk in the Dept. of State, I must suggest your opinion is contrary to reality in my view and experience.