There are laws defining citizenship and laws stipulating the conditions for non citizens. In most cases, there is freedom of movement from one country to another for various reasons. Illegal immigrants are those who happen to be in another country unlawfully. California records the highest numbers of illegal immigrants, most having been lured by the search for better jobs.
There has been an argument against these immigrations based on the fact that they seem to be a strain on the available public amenities. A clear example is how a slight reduction in the price of tomatoes would see illegal immigrants flock into the US. The fight to ban immigration is toughening as times went on in the US where most opponents argue that the move should be kind especially to kids who should not be forced or fully evicted from school. Some republicans think it may not be fair to deny immigrants their civil rights. (Borjas 220).
This paper focuses on the enforcement of immigrants’ laws and the negative effects of the laws in the United States. Most of the United States migration laws are not based on equality, respect for individual rights and fairness. Their restrictions are based on crude and arbitrary utilitarian calculations of the relative costs that are offered by immigration groups of the United States society.
There is also a strong misconception of the United State national Sovereignty. This serves historically as a justification for border restrictions which accelerates the conflict between the liberal theory and immigration exclusions. (LeMay M. C., xxxiv) Despite the fact that the United States recognizes the interstate travel right; they have completely refused to acknowledge the right of immigrants to cross national boundaries. The Supreme Court has put a boundary between its citizens under the new constitution.
According to the constitution, the non citizens lack any rights for entry in the country. The disabled who are protected under the Disabilities Act also face discrimination in immigration. They are denied entry being regarded as inadmissible “aliens” who cannot be allowed to enter. Racial discrimination has also been entertained in the Unite States immigration history whereby immigration laws in the U.S. have punished people of a different color. As Puerto Ricans, we have experienced racial hatred often transferred from citizens of United States to the immigrants who share similar ancestries. (LeMay M. C., xxxiv)
The United States have complied with the color blindness laws that are demanded with the U.S. However in Supreme Court, non citizens are disproportionately restricted from entering the country. The culmination of this is the creation of tension with the nation stated commitment equality under the law. There is also an ignorance of laws that are protective to the poor, disabled, and HIV positive and racial minorities even under the U.S. immigration laws. It has been realized that there are no moral jurisdictions in keeping these groups out of the United States.
Records have also shown that racial hatred transfer from citizens in United States to the immigrants who share similar ancestries. (LeMay M. C 26) Several states have enacted laws that show no mercy, even for immigrants with steady jobs, deep community roots, a history of paying taxes and children who are citizens. Undocumented and lawful immigrants have fewer rights compared to the citizens of the United States. Lack of equal rights extends to exploitation in the secondary market, low wages and very few legal protections. There is also a racial caste system which cannot be reconciled with the liberty and equality.
The United States immigrants’ laws also do not cater for moral migration policy. Churches and religious leaders have criticized the authenticity and morality of modern immigration policies. The immigration laws should be treated as humanitarian way rather than being punishable to the immigrants. Despite the efforts to violate the immigrants’ laws on moral grounds, the government has refused to change the immigrants’ laws to satisfy these basic moral imperatives.
The rights of the individual immigrants have been historically trumped at the expense of the nation-state rights. The ability of people to move comfortably together with their family which is an ultimate freedom and fundamental for human beings has been denied. (Johnson K.R.71) Immigrants have also been discriminated on acquiring educational benefits. There has been a debate on whether to provide education benefits to the illegal immigrants over years in the nation.
The federal courts have used the Welfare Reform Act to assist the immigrants’ access educational benefits. However portions of the proposition 187 advocates for the denying of illegal immigrants as well as harsh treatment to those suspected being illegal immigrants This is based on the argument that there happens to be a lot of American citizens without proper documents and the use of documents to verify whether one qualifies to access education.
Majority of the opponents of the ban however still feel that the current number of illegal immigrants in school is not yet a burden or an issue of concern to warrant such crude measures. It is believed that the cessation of government support to immigrant’s education would go along way in ensuring that illegal immigration is reduced by a large magnitude. This is attributed to the fact that any form of gain acts as an incentive to the immigrants (Haines & Rosenblum 133)Immigrant workers have been negatively affected by the immigrants’ laws in some states in America. Oklahoma, which has one of the toughest new laws, now prevents illegal immigrants from getting state services.
It also requires employers to verify whether new workers are legal, gives people a way to sue companies that hire illegal immigrants, and makes it a felony to transport, harbor or conceal an illegal immigrant. The enforcement of the law has been so harsh to the illegal immigrants. Simple humanity is the character which has been lacking and recognition that the vast majority of those affected do not have any malicious intent.
The immigrants usually does not come United States so that they can be robbers but to improve their lives through hard work contrary to how they are treated. Inhuman treatment is given to them where families are uprooted, and parents are separated from their kids. (Johnson K.R.29)Legal residents and citizens are also hurt by the current immigration laws.
This mostly happens where spouses, parents or children are illegal. Their relatives are the ones who are placed at risk for “harboring” them at their homes or “transporting” them to church. Oklahoma Hispanic groups estimate that around 25,000 people left the state after the law was approved. The number of students who attended School dropped, workers disappeared, church attendance shrank and most Latino businesses lost customers. There are several reports that shows police in some places target Hispanic drivers for roadside stops and document checks.
This has forced citizens to be carrying passports or birth certificates to avoid being jailed and other forms police harassment. (U.S.A.Today 2007)Business organizations have also been negatively affected by the current immigration laws. Employers complain that they’re being asked to become immigration police with imperfect tools. In Oklahoma there was a study which predicted that the current law could cost more than $1 billion in a year the state’s economy.
All firms that specialize in finding new locations for businesses said some companies have removed Oklahoma from their lists. (U.S.A.Today) The supporters of current immigration laws include corporate interests that profit from cheap foreign labor, ethnic lobbies seeking to increase their political base, and religious activists, humanitarians, and civil libertarians who focus on human rights and other ethical concerns.
Opponents include non-European immigrants as a threat to American culture, environmentalists who dread immigration-fueled population growth, and labor advocates who fear that immigration is taking jobs from U.S. citizens and depressing U.S. wages. On political spectrum, free marketers square off against cultural conservatives.
The federal immigration law could be highlighted as hypocritical and ineffectual it has been passed to ensure that there is cheap labor in the country but on the other hand, the nation does not want immigrants. The united states have taken great steps trying to enforce the U.S border laws but it has failed to achieve the intended goals. Even with the current immigration laws, the nation is still insecure and the immigrants faced different social, economic and political challenges.
Borjas G. Heaven’s door: immigration policy and the American economy. Princeton University Press, 2001 190-250
Haines, David W & Rosenblum, Karen Elaine. Illegal immigration in America: a reference handbook. Greenwood Publishing Group, 1999,133
Hirschman C, Kasinitz P and DeWind J. The handbook of international migration: the
American experience. Russell Sage Foundation Publishers, 1999, 360-370
Johnson K. R. Opening the floodgates: why America needs to rethink its borders and