The Immigration Debate - part 3 - The Constitutional Perspective

The cure for the evils of democracy is more democracy!

H. L. Mencken, Notes on Democracy, 1926

Given the lapse between blog posts, it is perhaps instructive to repeat the comments made by Attorney General Eric Holder during an April 24th speech to the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund with respect to what is being proffered as the Obama administrations’ perspective on the immigration debate:

"Creating a pathway to earned citizenship for the 11 million unauthorized immigrants in this country is essential. The way we treat our friends and neighbors who are undocumented – by creating a mechanism for them to earn citizenship and move out of the shadows – transcends the issue of immigration status. This is a matter of civil and human rights. It is about who we are as a nation. And it goes to the core of our treasured American principle of equal opportunity."

With equal parts frustration, exasperation and incredulity, it is difficult to decide where to begin with such an idiotic and ignorant statement, but the Madison Conservative will attempt to do just that.

“A pathway to earned citizenship” – There already exists a pathway to citizenship – it is the immigration law of the United States. The Attorney General is the chief law enforcement official in the government – perhaps he should familiarize himself with the laws already on the books to deal with immigration.

“Unauthorized immigrants”. As previously noted, the language of the debate is critical. ‘Immigrant’ is a legal status – it is impossible to be an ‘unauthorized’ anything and retain legal status.

“The way we treat our friends and neighbors who are undocumented”. We should treat them with respect surely, but by using euphemisms such as 'undocumented’ attempts to convey that they are simply returning a gift without a proper receipt. There is a legal process to attain status under the law in this nation. Breaking that law should not be shrouded in colorful and sympathetic language. People who have broken the law should be referred to by their true legal status – ‘defendants’, and treated as such. By all means, if the administration wishes to change the law for future peoples, that is surely their right – under the law. In the same way a law cannot be enforced retroactively, so then a privilege cannot be conferred retroactively.

“By creating a mechanism for them to earn citizenship and move out of the shadows”. It must be noted here that it was a choice of these individuals to break the law, thus forcing them into ‘the shadows’. Few criminals flaunt their location to the authorities. If they choose to accept responsibility for their choices, there exists a ‘mechanism’ for them to earn citizenship – the immigration laws of the United States. It is troubling that the Attorney General seems oblivious to this reality.

“This is a matter of civil and human rights.” Actually, it is not, in any fashion or form. If one was to accept this idiotic statement, the next question must be answered. Why have any borders? If it is a matter of ‘civil and human rights’, then we should allow any person who wishes to live here to be allowed in. There is thus then no need for immigration policy, border agents and border security – any and all aspects of sovereignty for a nation no longer exists. Surely the billions of people around the world who are not enjoying the fruits of democracy should be allowed immediate entrance to then what was once the United States of America, a nation which would cease to exist , given the abolition of borders, all in the name of ‘civil and human rights’. This is a classic lie foisted by the political left. To prove this point, the Madison Conservative would ask the Attorney General if he would accept this proposition. Allow all the current illegal aliens some manner of legal status, save for forbidding them to vote for the next thirty years.

Exactly. No one of the political left would accept that concept. The question is why not? If this is about human and civil rights, fine, just omit the option for them to vote. The hypocrisy and cynicism of the Administration is thus revealed to the American people, who must enjoin the immigration debate with that understanding.

“It is about who we are as a nation.” The accepted political mantra from the left is always “we are a nation of laws”, a phrase invoked at every opportunity to castigate and chastise their opposition. Fine, we are indeed a nation of laws. Perhaps the Attorney General of the United States should start enforcing them on people who flaunt them.

“And it goes to the core of our treasured American principle of equal opportunity.” Yes, Mr. Attorney General, equal opportunity for the citizens of the greatest nation the world has ever known, but not for those who attempt to circumvent the due legal process, processes enacted to "support, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States”.

That was part of the oath you swore to when you accepted the position of Attorney General. The American people would only ask that you honor your oath, instead of playing cynical political games and exhibiting political cowardice for simple political expediency.

The American people deserve better.