|
 any
conservatives who criticized Bill Clinton's lawless behavior, supported
his impeachment, and urged his ouster are today arguing for some
form of legal status, even outright amnesty, for millions of aliens
who are in the United States illegally.
Apparently
the rule of law, one of the foundational principles of our Republic,
is to be applied selectively.
And there are
basically two arguments made in defense of this position: 1. Illegal
immigrants do work that American citizens will not do; and 2. If
Republicans lead the appeal for legalization, they will be rewarded
politically by the growing Hispanic population. The first argument
is proffered without proof, and the second argument, even if accurate,
is merely expedient. Neither point justifies the widespread and
continuing violation of U.S. federal law.
Congress and
the president decide which and how many aliens will be granted legal
status. If they want to liberalize the immigration standards and
increase the level of immigration, they can do that. Instead, congressional
Democrats and President Bush are speaking and acting approvingly
of people whose first act in coming to the U.S. was to break federal
law. It's an odd spectacle to watch the lawmakers and the lawbreakers
in consensus.
When the federal government encourages the violation of the very
laws it imposes, it undermines its own authority. There are thousands
of Border Patrol agents who risk their lives everyday to limit illegal
immigration.
Tens of millions of dollars are spent by the federal government
every year on more sophisticated technology to increase detection
and interception on the borders. But to what end? What is the federal
policy respecting illegal immigration?
As long as
America's political leaders thumb their noses at the rule of law,
there's no reason to expect better from citizens of other countries
who want to live in the U.S.
|
