Obama’s Immigration Enforcement Policy in Limbo
When it comes to workplace raids, the Department of Homeland Security has lots of options — all of them bad.
Napolitano is more interested in going after smugglers than illegal immigrants.
“To me,” she said, “the smart way to enforce the immigration law in terms of the workplace is to aim at that part of the illegal labor market as opposed to just collecting stats on how many workers we’ve picked up.”
That is just as well. Napolitano’s stats aren’t so good. Consider what happened in Bellingham, Wash., the site of the first workplace raid carried out under this administration. This month, it was reported that ICE released more than two dozen illegal immigrants apprehended in that raid and even gave them work permits so they could stay in the country, get new jobs, and help with an investigation of the employer whose plant was raided. The work permits expire when the case is closed.
Still, I can’t imagine that ICE agents would — as a matter of policy — walk into a business that was hiring illegal immigrants, arrest the employers and a spattering of immigrant criminals, and leave the other immigrant workers behind. That would be politically toxic. Imagine the outcry on talk radio and in the conservative blogosphere. That kind of change in policy just won’t fly.
Besides, under the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act, law enforcement authorities can’t build criminal cases against employers unless they prove that management knowingly hired illegal immigrants. They can’t do that unless they prove the workers are, in fact, in the country illegally.
Put it all together and it’s obvious what would happen if there were more raids: everyone in the wrong would get arrested.
Fine. That’s as it should be. Enforce the law.
The only reason the administration hasn’t said so publicly is because it’s likely to enrage some of the president’s left-wing supporters, including immigrant activists and civil libertarians. Actually, come to think of it, there may be another reason. If the administration starts indiscriminately rounding up illegal immigrants in workplace raids, it will openly contradict what candidate Barack Obama said while he was running for president. When speaking to Hispanic groups, Obama lamented when “communities are terrorized by ICE immigration raids — when nursing mothers are torn from their babies, when children come home from school to find their parents missing.”
That could get embarrassing. It is no wonder that the Department of Homeland Security seems paralyzed. When it comes to workplace raids, it has lots of options — all of them bad.
<- Prev Page 2 of 2
Ruben Navarrette Jr. is a member of the editorial board of the San Diego Union Tribune, a nationally syndicated columnist, a frequent lecturer, and a regular contributor to CNN.com.
 |
 |
 |
Podcasts |  PJM Home |
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
19 Comments
1. Terry Gain:The Obaman has an Immigration Enforcement Policy? Do tell.
Apr 16, 2009 - 4:30 am 2. David Thomson:“…when children come home from school to find their parents missing.”
So what? The children of all fathers and mothers who break the law often “come home from school to find their parents missing.” I am also amazed that Ruben Navarrette Jr. didn’t mention the extremely successful program, which compels employers to match the social security numbers of a job applicant with the U.S. government’s database. This may be about all we need to solve the problem. And yet, the Obama administration may abandon it in the very near future. What’s up with that?
Apr 16, 2009 - 4:36 am 3. Pete Murphy:Rampant population growth threatens our economy and quality of life. Immigration, both legal and illegal, are fueling this growth. I’m not talking about environmental degradation or resource depletion. I’m talking about the effect upon rising unemployment and poverty in America.
I should introduce myself. I am the author of a book titled “Five Short Blasts: A New Economic Theory Exposes The Fatal Flaw in Globalization and Its Consequences for America.” To make a long story short, my theory is that, as population density rises beyond some optimum level, per capita consumption of products begins to decline out of the need to conserve space. People who live in crowded conditions simply don’t have enough space to use and store many products. This declining per capita consumption, in the face of rising productivity (per capita output, which always rises), inevitably yields rising unemployment and poverty.
This theory has huge implications for U.S. policy toward population management, especially immigration policy. Our policies of encouraging high rates of immigration are rooted in the belief of economists that population growth is a good thing, fueling economic growth. Through most of human history, the interests of the common good and business (corporations) were both well-served by continuing population growth. For the common good, we needed more workers to man our factories, producing the goods needed for a high standard of living. This population growth translated into sales volume growth for corporations. Both were happy.
But, once an optimum population density is breached, their interests diverge. It is in the best interest of the common good to stabilize the population, avoiding an erosion of our quality of life through high unemployment and poverty. However, it is still in the interest of corporations to fuel population growth because, even though per capita consumption goes into decline, total consumption still increases. We now find ourselves in the position of having corporations and economists influencing public policy in a direction that is not in the best interest of the common good.
The U.N. ranks the U.S. with eight third world countries – India, Pakistan, Nigeria, Democratic Republic of Congo, Bangladesh, Uganda, Ethiopia and China – as accounting for fully half of the world’s population growth by 2050. It’s absolutely imperative that our population be stabilized, and that’s impossible without dramatically reining in immigration, both legal and illegal.
If you’re interested in learning more about this important new economic theory, I invite you to visit my web site at OpenWindowPublishingCo.com where you can read the preface, join in my blog discussion and, of course, purchase the book if you like. (It’s also available at Amazon.com.)
Please forgive the somewhat spammish nature of the previous paragraph. I just don’t know how else to inject this new perspective into the immigration debate without drawing attention to the book that explains the theory.
Pete Murphy
Apr 16, 2009 - 6:19 am 4. David Thomson:Author, “Five Short Blasts”
“It was shameful that the Bush administration turned a blind eye to bosses while busting the workers.”
Ruben Navarrette Jr conveniently forgets that previous to the U.S. government’s social security database being available to employers—it would cost a small fortune to screen job applicants. Left-wing lawyers essentially forced these companies to screen all employees, and not just those of Hispanic origins. Those many illegal aliens who possessed well put together false ID cards made is it especially difficult. Employers were caught between the proverbial rock and a hard place.
Apr 16, 2009 - 7:42 am 5. Paul -Indiana:To those who are concerned that families will be broken up, don’t fret. Deport them all.
Apr 16, 2009 - 8:22 am 6. Bilgeman:Mr. Navarette:
“Napolitano is more interested in going after smugglers than illegal immigrants.
“To me,” she said, “the smart way to enforce the immigration law in terms of the workplace is to aim at that part of the illegal labor market as opposed to just collecting stats on how many workers we’ve picked up.””
If I was a bettin’ man, I’d wager that Napolitano is the first Cabinet-level stooge from the Alleged Hawaiian’s administration to be forced to resign.
Between making up the “Obama’s Enemies List” and not enforcing Immigration Laws, she’s put her boobs into the clothes-wringer remarkably quickly.
Unda da bus, Janet!
Apr 16, 2009 - 11:38 am 7. DoctorT:Napolitano is more interested in going after “Right wing extremists”, you know the type: veterans, pro-lifers, people opposed to higher taxes, those who lost alot during this economic downturn, catholics, etc,…..
This administration wants to legalize illegal aliens and provide in state tuition to illegal immigrants. It doesn’t pay to be a citizen under this president.
Apr 16, 2009 - 4:47 pm 8. expat:Simple solution – go after the illegals AND those employing them. Who says it’s either/or?
Apr 16, 2009 - 9:56 pm 9. Nadaem Ahmad:Instead of penalizing hard working people who would otherwise turn to crime to feed their families, if anyone is to be punished, its the greedy American bosses who hire this labor.
Why punish hard working workers when the fatcat American lazy hogs both male and the female species who benefit from the labor of these poor people silently enjoy the benefits of this quasi-slavery and then point their fat fingers at them ‘illegals’ at every opportunity.
I say if you have benefitted from the labor of an illegal, you need to STFU.
Thank you
Apr 17, 2009 - 9:28 am 10. Bill:Nadaem Ahmad:
“penalizing hard working people who would otherwise turn to crime to feed their families”
If their turn to crime takes place in Mexico where they belong, who cares?
“fatcat American lazy hogs both male and the female species who benefit from the labor of these poor people silently enjoy the benefits of this quasi-slavery ”
My, you sure hate the country you’ve chosen to live in, don’t you? You’re always free to find another one, you know.
This particular “fatcat American lazy hog” has never benefitted from the labor of an illegal- but they sure as hell have benefitted from mine!
I say NO taxpayer benefits for illegals, period.
Apr 17, 2009 - 9:23 pm 11. Bilgeman:#9 Nadaem Ahmad:
“Why punish hard working workers”
Because they are stealing the jobs of other hard working family people who are here legally.
Additionally, someone who works for less money to do the same job depresses wages for everyone else.
You’re not very bright, are you Ahmad? Simple economics here…not rocket science.
“if anyone is to be punished, its the greedy American bosses who hire this labor.”
I have no problem with that.
If you want to attack an undesirable economic system, you have to go after BOTH sides of the transaction, the guy who buys the product or service,(in this case, labor), and the guy who sells it.
“I say if you have benefitted from the labor of an illegal, you need to STFU.”
Too broad a brush…if you have knowingly hired an illegal, you need STFU AND PTFU, (Pay The F Up!).
If you are an ilegal, you need the STFU and GTFO,(Get The F Out).
BTW, Ahmad,your PAPERS, please….
Apr 18, 2009 - 6:29 am 12. Federale:What a liar. Once the Bush Administration started enforcing the law after the failure of amnesty, they also indicted dozens of executives and managers at the companies that were raided for immigration violations. The Clinton Regime police was minor raids and no fines on employers. The Bush I policy was raids and large fines. Dishonesty does not become you Ruben.
Apr 18, 2009 - 5:41 pm 13. Ex Canuck now legally in USA.:It took me 30 years to put myself into a position where I qualified for a resident category visa and then a green card. But as a former Canadian living within 50 miles of the border I crossed as a tourist frequently and always returned to Canada because I repected America’s laws. I could easily have disappeared into the illegal milieau any time from the 1970’s.
My opinion? Deport every single illegal currently resident in the USA without hesitation. These people make clowns out of legal immigrants like me who followed the rules. And they make a mockery of the USA as a country run according to law.
Apr 18, 2009 - 6:31 pm 14. lee:Deporting every single illegal immigrant in the country is (logsitically?) impossible. I know Latinos and certain “La Raza” groups dominate the immigration debate, but remember – Many Asians FLEW in here legally, then overstayed tourist of student visas.
A libertarian approach is the best option – cut the red tape and regulations that encourage Latinos to cross illegally. If they want to ditch their miserable country and come over here for a better life, I say we facilitate their efforts. If you haven’t raped babies or something or slept with Al Qaeda members, make it easy for them to come in.
I feel chest thumping immigration activists who smear the right on immigration (who actually embrace legal immigrants) may hardened some conservatives. Don’t be fooled – many reasonable illegals will accept the sovereingty of this country and accept some kind of compromise.
Apr 18, 2009 - 8:08 pm 15. vivo:Proposal:
No raid necessary.
1. Go to a business HR Dept, analyze data for illegals, identify illegals.
2. Fine business owner according to law.
3. Analyze criminal records of illegals.
4. Deport illegals with bad criminal records.
5. Do not deport clean illegals, put them in queue for green card.
End of story.
Apr 18, 2009 - 10:40 pm 16. Ken Hahn:The Obama administration will no longer deport illegals. It will turn them over to ACORN.
Apr 19, 2009 - 1:53 am 17. Bilgeman:#14 lee:
“Deporting every single illegal immigrant in the country is (logsitically?) impossible.”
Nonsense.
Purely as an observation of a logistical exercise for purposes of comparison, the Third Reich deported and murdered 6 million Jews and significant populations of Gypsies, homosexuals, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and other victims which it deemed political enemies, all while fighting a World War on at least 3 different theaters of operations.
And the Nazis only had protp-computer Hollerith punch-card tabulators to assist their effort.
(Read “IBM and the Holocaust” to see how they used these).
It’s quite do-able…all it needs is the will to enforce the laws.
Apr 19, 2009 - 8:34 pm 18. MJR:This Secretary of Homeland Napolitano is taking this country back instead of forward. She is giving a free ticket to illegals and encouraging more illegal immigration into the US. Yes we do need to keep up with raids, deport the illegals and file criminal charges against employers to do employee illegals. She just finished giving 20-30 green cards to illegals that were caught in a raid in Washington State. They were rounded up the ICE and ready to deport them when she had them set free and gave them green cards. Now she wants to do away with the REAL ID that is in effect so illegals will not have to hide…. Where did this woman get an education and how was she approved to this position??? I feel she is giving a “Welcome” sign to all illegals and encouraging more to come.
Apr 23, 2009 - 6:23 am 19. mike:laws are laws, our government passes thousands each year, they are susposed to be enforced by our government officials be it federal, state, etc. To only enforce the laws Napolitano likes should place her in a position of being arrested for not upholding the laws of the land. If all of us only followed the laws we like, it would be quite a different world, I would be a billionaire who didn’t pay taxes and look out if I took offence to your word.
Apr 23, 2009 - 6:24 am