Distinctions among Immigrants Call for Immigration Reform
In the last seven months, the crisis of people illegally entering the United States at our southern border has been addressed through stricter enforcement resulting in few, if any, illegal entries. Accompanying this tactic has been an increase in the number of arrests of people who are illegally in the United States, including members of cartels and gangs and those who have committed violent crimes either here or in their country of origin. Most reasonable people recognize this as a positive contribution to the common good of society. Nobody wants to live with the threat of violence perpetrated against the vulnerable, especially those who live in close proximity to these criminals.
Current discussion regarding the treatment of undocumented aliens and the enforcement of immigration law includes disagreement over the relevance of a distinction between those who are present here illegally for the purpose of committing violent crimes with those who are without legal status but have traveled here to seek employment in order to provide for the lives of their families who otherwise would face destitution. A dominant opinion is that no further consideration needs to be given to the situation once it is established that someone is here without legal authorization. “They do not belong here; send them all back,” is the blunt refrain. This attitude does not prepare us spiritually for the judgment that awaits us: “I was a stranger, and you gave me no welcome.”
Yet, amid all of the argument and turbulence regarding deportations of those here illegally, I have not heard any calls for stronger consequences for those who violate the law in hiring those without legitimate documents for legal authorization to work. It seems that too frequently such employers are not held accountable or are easily able to pay the fines should they actually be enforced. Here, I am not speaking of traffickers but rather those who illegally employ people who are frequently among the group of undocumented aliens who seek employment to provide for their families. There have been few cries to hold such employers accountable for their failure to follow immigration law. Employers are required to follow the I-9 employment eligibility verification process to ensure that they are only hiring employees who are legally authorized to work in the United States, which includes examining the documents that establish their eligibility. Verification of such information is frequently handled in only a cursory manner.
If advocates for deportation without further consideration of why someone is here without legal authorization are consistent, they would include stricter enforcement of harsher penalties upon those who employ people without legal authorization to work in the United States. It should follow that if laws were more strictly enforced or if immigration reform included stricter penalties, the problem of illegal immigration might be resolved.
Yet, this has been precisely at the heart of our refusal as a nation for over 30 years to address this problem. The lack of enforcement or even of legitimate accountability on the part of employers to follow immigration laws remains unchecked because there exists a need for laborers in these areas of service and agriculture that is greater than the law currently allows. The result is that many workers who are working without legal authorization frequently are exploited by unjust wages, lack of health benefits, and threats of intimidation, while contributing financially to Social Security and seeking only to provide for their families.
The crisis concerning the just enforcement of immigration law will not be resolved by hostile discourse or a refusal to make relevant distinctions because we do not like the inconvenience of accountability. The distinction between criminals who have been involved with trafficking drugs or human beings and people who have come to our country without legal authorization and who have worked productively among us, sometimes for decades, is an important distinction for just, reasonable, and compassionate immigration reform.