Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Amnesty is Misplaced Compassion
The Claremont Institute ^ | March 27, 2002 | Edward J. Erler

Posted on 08/02/2002 4:02:28 PM PDT by aconservaguy

The Claremont Institute

This is the print version of http://www.claremont.org/writings/20020327erler.html.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amnesty is Misplaced Compassion

By Edward J. Erler

Posted March 27, 2002

During last week's marathon trip to Latin America President George Bush failed to deliver to Mexico's president Vicente Fox a long-promised gift — a signed and sealed illegal immigrant amnesty bill. The proposal would provide amnesty for hundreds of thousands of aliens who have overstayed their visas and are residing illegally in the United States.

Before September 11, an amnesty bill appeared to be a certainty. Bush touted it as an act of compassion toward Mexico, an act that could only lead to better relations with our southern neighbors. Fox, of course, has a strong interest in the amnesty bill. Immigration to the U.S. provides Mexico with a much needed outlet for Mexico's desperate and malcontent poor. Illegal alien workers also provide much needed revenue for the Mexican economy, sending billions of dollars each year back to Mexico. Amnesty is well designed to help cover for Fox's dismal economic performance, particularly his failure to create the hundreds of thousands of jobs he promised.

At the same time, Mexico is making extraordinary efforts to seal its southern borders with Guatemala and Belize. Mexico clearly recognizes the dangers to its internal politics and economy posed by illegal immigration from its southern neighbors — no compassion there.

September's terrorist acts, however, taught Americans — or so it seemed — that illegal immigration should not be treated casually. Indeed, strident calls for tightening the border were heard from all quarters. And, for all intents and purposes, the border with Mexico was closed for a short period with remarkable effects on the flow of illegal aliens as well as illegal drugs.

Another amnesty, such as the one that occurred in 1986, will certainly be a spur to more illegal immigration. If there have been two amnesties who can doubt that there will be more? These bad precedents will create bad habits. Indeed they already have.

Amnesty for illegal aliens is simply a reward for law-breaking. No system depending on a strict regard for the rule of law can treat law-breaking so lightly. This is particularly true when those who are attempting to enter the country legally are forced to wait years and undergo massive bureaucratic battles. Amnesty is something we should always regard with deep suspicion because it excuses law-breakers. Amnesty is appropriate only when it serves the dignity of the law. When the law, contrary to its intent, has worked an injustice, amnesty might be an appropriate remedy. But when amnesty is used merely to excuse law-breaking or for cynical political purposes it directly undermines the rule of law.

Some years ago the Congress considered a bill that would have withdrawn birth-right citizenship for children born to illegal alien parents. When the Fourteenth Amendment was passed in 1868 it defined American citizenship for the first time. It included all who were born or naturalized in theUnited States and subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. It was widely understood at the time that Indians would not become citizens by the operation of the Fourteenth Amendment because they owed allegiance to their tribes and therefore did not fall under the United States' "jurisdiction" — which means not just legal obligations and protections, but also a patriotic attachment to the Constitution and founding principles of the nation.

Thus Indians born in the United States did not become citizens by that fact alone. Today, we confer automatically on the children of illegal aliens a status that was refused to Native Persons. How we came to hold this view is something of a mystery to constitutional scholars since there is no Supreme Court case on point. Indians became citizens when laws were passed by Congress bringing them within the jurisdiction of the United States. Congress could pass similar laws excluding children of illegal aliens from automatic citizenship, thereby depriving illegal aliens of a powerful incentive to break American laws.

Latino leaders in the Democratic party complained that Bush's amnesty plan and his much publicized trip to Latin America were merely cynical ploys to curry favor with Latino voters. The vehemence of the Democratic response indicates that they may be concerned that Bush is succeeding. The Democratic response may itself be too cynical. Whether cynical or not, the idea that amnesty is an act of compassion is certainly misplaced.

Edward J. Erler is a senior fellow of the Claremont Institute and professor of political science at California State San Bernardino.


TOPICS: Culture/Society
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-42 next last

1 posted on 08/02/2002 4:02:28 PM PDT by aconservaguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: aconservaguy
Amesty has nothing to do with compassion. It has to do with greed (bribes, cheap labor, etc.), with sympathy for criminals, with dislike for out culture, and/or a desire to make it easy for terrorist and drug dealers to get into this country.
2 posted on 08/02/2002 4:08:29 PM PDT by Dante3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aconservaguy; Tancredo Fan; Sabertooth; Reaganwuzthebest
A big NO AMNESTY and review of the bogus, liberal, interpretation of the 14th amendment by the Supreme Court BUMP!
3 posted on 08/02/2002 4:13:10 PM PDT by 4Freedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mhking
a succinct article re: another amnesty will lead to more illegals.
4 posted on 08/02/2002 4:15:44 PM PDT by Black Agnes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Black Agnes
Of course it will. I can see no benefits of amnesty for this country, only more trouble. Already we have too many people. Even our Civil War battlefields are being destroyed housing developments. And surely we have enough crime. I read that the father of the killer pedophile Avila was an illegal.
5 posted on 08/02/2002 4:48:48 PM PDT by Dante3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: 4Freedom
Another amnesty, such as the one that occurred in 1986, will certainly be a spur to more illegal immigration.

Everyone knows this, yet we keep hearing about more amnesties. Makes me wonder if illegal immigration is just what the doctor ordered in Washington.

6 posted on 08/02/2002 5:01:23 PM PDT by Reaganwuzthebest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Reaganwuzthebest
It's certainly what Marx ordered!
7 posted on 08/02/2002 5:10:22 PM PDT by Black Agnes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: WRhine
ping!
8 posted on 08/02/2002 5:10:47 PM PDT by Black Agnes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: aconservaguy
There are milions of Mexicans and Central and South Americans just waiting for an amnesty to be declared so the can come north and claim that is covers them because they'd really (wink, wink) were here or, actually, would have been here by the magic date. An amnesty will only encourage millions more to come and if they lose their claim that they were covered under the 2002 amnesty, they'll simply militate to be covered by the next amnesty. Of course, these folks do take the jobs at the low end of the scale. But, in doing so, depress US wages and make it very difficult for those coming off welfare to actually find a job. The illegal aliens begin their climb on a lower rung of the ladder but as they climb, prevent Americans from grtting on the ladder, at all.
9 posted on 08/02/2002 5:11:48 PM PDT by Tacis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Black Agnes
It's certainly what Marx ordered!

The fastest way to a socialist revolution is to destroy the middle class. Latin American countries don't have one, and there's perpetual war. Unlimited, uneducated immigration is eventually going to give us the same results.

Lenin said the capitalists would hang themselves with their own rope.

10 posted on 08/02/2002 5:18:50 PM PDT by Reaganwuzthebest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Reaganwuzthebest
I used to think that supporting amnesty for illegal immigrants was only suicidal for Republicans. Now, looking at what the Green Party is doing in California, it may turn out to be the Kevorkian of both parties.

A Hispanic 3rd Party that could win in all the major cities. That would be a major kick in the teeth for the Democrats.

11 posted on 08/02/2002 5:22:36 PM PDT by 4Freedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: aconservaguy
Ordinarily these free market types at Claremont would be all for immigration and in the past they were. They shrugged at illegal immigration.

9-11 nudged them a bit.
12 posted on 08/02/2002 5:22:38 PM PDT by dennisw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tacis
Right on! Amnesty is like hanging out a 50 mile high flashing neon sign. Saying come to America illegally and soon enough you will recieve approval and amnesty. Imbecile Americans will fall for your lies and sob stories.

Just look at those disgusting Mexican ID cards. Now other nations are also issuing them to their illegal USA squatters.
13 posted on 08/02/2002 5:26:29 PM PDT by dennisw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: 4Freedom
A Hispanic 3rd Party that could win in all the major cities. That would be a major kick in the teeth for the Democrats.

That could turn out to be a silver lining if the Hispanics form their own party, split the democratic vote thereby giving victory to the Republicans, even in California. I would hope though that the Republicans would still reform immigration and send illegals home. A scenario like that could keep them in power, or at least the democrats at bay for many years to come.

14 posted on 08/02/2002 5:33:58 PM PDT by Reaganwuzthebest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Dante3
Amesty has nothing to do with compassion.

I've had friends who came here on student visas had work permits etc, who became productive taxpaying members of society, but because over time they neglected to dot all their i's and cross all the t's with INS became illegal.
Deciding to give them a break and not force them to leave their job, their friends and productive life and shipping them back to rotten hopeless conditions in the country they left, is in fact about compassion.

Of course I don't believe in blanket amnesty, but in cases where it is good for us and them, I don't oppose it.

15 posted on 08/02/2002 5:40:38 PM PDT by Jorge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Reaganwuzthebest
I believe the Hispanics have the votes in alot of cities and maybe a few states to win elections. If not now, soon.

That means that Republicans would be trying to deal with two parties in Congress that are (slightly) more liberal than they are. >sarcasm<
16 posted on 08/02/2002 5:41:51 PM PDT by 4Freedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Jorge
The problem is alot of these immigrants, we're allowing in outside of our regular immigration channels, are not a 'good deal' for us.

I'll bet the Americans that applied for the jobs your friends got don't think they got a 'great deal'.

The immigrants we've allowed in from Mexico send $9 Billion Dollars out of our economy, vote Democrat and use a ton of social services. And that's just Mexico.

Other Freepers have mentioned that Mexican immigrants can claim dependents that are still living in Mexico, on their tax returns, so they pay no taxes.

Others, because they work for cash, declare so little income they don't pay taxes.

We need to start showing some compassion for the American people and get a handle on who and how many others we're letting into this country.

These border jumper's home countries are who should be obligated to show compassion for them.
17 posted on 08/02/2002 6:04:56 PM PDT by 4Freedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: dennisw
Neo-cons support legal immigration, not illegal immigration. After 9-11 some are rethinking their opposition to immigration reform.
18 posted on 08/02/2002 6:43:08 PM PDT by rmlew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: rmlew
I don't agree. The neo-cons all ignored illegal immigration. I was a paleo from way back who worked for Pat Buchannan. A lot of the reason being our out of control borders. Even our legal immigration is done wrong with little being skills based. With too much family reunification.
19 posted on 08/02/2002 6:47:51 PM PDT by dennisw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: dennisw
The Weekly Standard has opposed illegal immigrationm in the Past. TWS pretty much defines the neocon movement.
I would like to see a modified 1924 act, but it isn't going to happen.
I voted for Pat, but have become disillusioned with the anti-nationalism of many leading paleos.
20 posted on 08/02/2002 6:52:33 PM PDT by rmlew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-42 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson