Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Children, ‘Animals,’ and Immigrants
Maybe you’ve seen the video of the hero the French have dubbed “Spiderman.” When he saw a toddler dangling off a fourth story balcony, he scaled the exterior of the Paris building in about 30 seconds to save the child. Turns out Mamoudou Gassama was a newly-arrived illegal immigrant from Mali. A grateful President Emmanuel Macron made him a French citizen a day later.
Or consider the story of Jesus Manuel Cordova. He illegally crossed the border from Mexico into Arizona and came upon a damaged car. Inside was a dead mother and an injured nine-year-old boy. Cordova stayed with the child for hours until help arrived.
So, does that mean all illegal immigrants are heroes? Obviously not, no more than the crimes of MS-13 or the murder of Kate Steinle prove that all immigrants are criminals.
Both parties are resorting to stereotypes and incitement. The Democrats, intent upon portraying the utter depravity of the Trump Administration’s approach to immigration, seized upon a story that the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency had “lost” 1,475 illegal immigrant minors who were separated from their parents. A widely-cited story alleged that federal officials could not find these kids. Several pointed to a Frontline account alleging that at least some of the kids had been released to human traffickers.
But within a couple of days, the corrections flowed in. It wasn’t, the New York Times and others advised, that the kids were lost. Rather, these were among the “unaccompanied minors” who crossed the border in 2014. They were placed with adults. The Times quoted Ephrat Livni of Quartz, who explained: “It certainly sounds bad,” but “many of those missing kids may well be with their parents or families, and they may have gone off the grid deliberately to avoid Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) authorities.” As for the Frontline story, it referenced a government report from 2016, i.e., before the current administration could be held accountable.
But here’s the irony: The Trump Administration’s position amounts to saying “We weren’t responsible for separating children from their parents, but going forward, we will be.” Attorney General Jeff Sessions has announced that separating even very young children from their parents will now be policy – as deterrence. “If you are smuggling a child then we will prosecute you, and that child will be separated from you as required by law,” he said. “If you don’t like that, then don’t smuggle children over our border.”
Well, if deterrence of illegal immigration justifies visiting the sins (if that’s what they are) of the parents upon the children, why stop there? Why not confine the children in cages, feed them only bread and water, and confiscate their teddy bears? After all, the current policy is indifferent to the suffering the children will experience in the name of punishing the parents, so why not ramp it up? Surely that would be an even better deterrent.
The president and his advisors routinely recommend harsh immigration measures on the grounds of national security and crime, as if our borders are being overrun by terrorists and rapists. An RNC campaign spot shows Nancy Pelosi criticizing President Trump’s use of the term “animals” regarding gang members. Her comments are juxtaposed against a gruesome story of a Satanic murder committed by a “Guatemalan native,” and other stories of crimes committed by MS-13. The tagline: “Democrats’ midterm message: MS-13 killers . . . they aren’t so bad.” At his Tennessee rally, President Trump, with characteristic judiciousness, told the crowd that Pelosi “loves MS-13.”
But it’s flatly false to say that immigrants are disproportionately represented among offenders. The CATO Institute has published several studies showing that immigrants are less likely to commit crimes than the native born, and illegal immigrants are the most law-abiding of all. Overall crime rates in the United States, despite an uptick in murders in certain cities since 2014, have declined by 64 percent since 1990, while immigration rates spiked (immigration rates have declined since 2005). A study by four universities found that the ten regions that had largest increases in immigrants all had lower levels of crime in 2016 than in 1980.
Of course there are awful cases. But the plural of anecdote is not data, and the appeal to fear is contemptible. Secretary of Homeland Security Kirsten Nielson expressed alarm that 300,000 would-be border crossers are apprehended yearly. But this is a stark drop from just 18 years ago, when more than 1.6 million were stopped. At the same time, more people are now leaving the US to return to Mexico than arriving from Mexico.
The dueling anecdote game can be played endlessly. ICE has arrested an illegal alien adult with Down Syndrome, whose three siblings and father live in the US. An armed ICE agent was videotaped using a crowbar to enter a home. When the occupants demanded a warrant, he said “You’ve been watching too many movies.”
Most ICE agents doubtless follow the law and shouldn’t be tarred by the bad acts of a few. The same can be said of immigrants.
Published in General
Not just illegal, but unconstitutional and racist!
Some years it’s more or less November 1 to May 1. Not lately, though.
Most of the Minneapolis area is pretty good at getting rid of the snow.
It sounds like you haven’t been to an emergency room lately. At least one in the Boston area.
Or the neighborhoods of Chicago I grew up in and live in. I don’t claim cultural change is some simple single variable phenomenon, but my experience is that too much immigration too fast is not good for anyone including the immigrants – and illegal immigration exacerbates the phenomenon as well as causes unique problems.
I beg to differ. That’s your opinion. Mine is considerably different.
Q: Are the members of this 10% being held only on immigration charges, or are they being held also on immigration charges.
I would add that because of the over-burdened courts and lawyerly traducing of the law, these illegals are in jail for a long time trying for appeal, and thus make up a large population for their own purposes (staying). If we could catch, establish, and deport in a matter of weeks instead of months or years, the percentage of illegals in jail would be considerably smaller.
Nah, she only visits the punch bowl to make the initial deposit.
It is too too restrictive. Except when it’s not restrictive enough. And then people die.
Oh, those people, with their smoked fish and their obscure metal bands can absolutely ruin your property values when enough of them move in. As bad as the Finns, just about.
According to Locke, in the state of nature, humans have the right to “life, liberty, and property.”
Unfortunately, in the state of nature, they can’t secure those rights; the strong run rampant, depriving others of life, liberty, and property.
So people create governments, giving up certain aspects of their natural rights (for example, giving up property via systems of taxation) in order to better secure their rights (by using taxes to fund a police force that can protect against murderers).
Thus, we live in a preexisting framework of laws, not in a state of nature. The question is, are laws restricting immigration unjust? Or do they merely create an inconvenience?
I don’t see how they are unjust. It’s hard to see how preventing outsiders from entering a country is a violation of the outsider’s right to his life, a violation of his right to his liberty (he’s a free man in his own country), or a violation of his right to his property (he has no property in the country he is trying to enter illegally).
This is just Locke, though. Perhaps Mike H. is working within the framework of some other political theorist.
Something about this post has been bugging me for days. It’s this:
Because it reminded me of my dad. Who barely escaped an accident where a car flipped a couple of times. A woman was trapped inside her car He climbed inside the car and sat beside her, holding her hand and keeping her awake until help – and the jaws of life – arrived and extricated her.
He came home calm, covered in blood, but had trouble telling us the story without crying.
My dad was extraordinary only because I knew him. I don’t doubt for one second that anyone would not do what he did, or what Jesus Manuel Cordova did.
So Mona, you cite a story as extraordinary which is in fact that which is expected and enjoyed in a civilized society.
Low expectations is the most insidious form of racism.
Yes, that’s correct. I’m using much different philosophical theory than most conservatives ascribe to.
I think the point was that he risked being deported by doing what is expected of anyone. He had more to lose than your extraordinary father.