7 Reasons Why "They Should Come Here Legally" Doesn't Work

Imagine your neighbor falls out of a tree and is critically injured. You struggle against all odds to hoist him into your car. You break every traffic law possible to get him to the hospital in time, even turfing part of the hospital's lawn making a sharp turn to enter. When you arrive, a policeman is waiting for you saying, "You should have just come here legally." The hospital refuses to admit you and the policeman takes you both to jail.

That feels horribly unfair. It feels like a cheap shot. The police and hospital are exploiting a technicality while ignoring the grave situation in front of them.

Most debates about immigration in the U.S. invariably feature someone who says:  "Why don't immigrants just come here legally?" That seems like a reasonable position at face value, until you start looking deeper and see that it fails to grasp the situation.

Here's why:

1. Enforcement. The law and enforcement of the law are two very different things. Much of the criticism today has to do with enforcement. Current U.S. immigration enforcement methods have been unnecessarily brutal and punitive, to the point of violating basic human rights and the right to due process. This is a major alarm that the faith community has raised in a unified voice. The US Catholic Bishops, the Southern Baptist Convention, and most denominations have spoken out against it, even staunchly conservative leaders such as Franklin Graham.

Controversial enforcement policies include President Trump's "Zero Tolerance Policy" as well as his executive order calling for indefinite detention of families. Previous policies were also seriously problematic, but these two new ones have raised concerns substantially.

Imagine if Child Protective Services came to your house and took away your children permanently just because you got a speeding ticket. The punishment has to fit the crime. On top of that, there is no law that forces us to abuse families. We always have the choice to enforce the law with mercy and civility.

2. Asylum seekers have not broken the law.  People have the right to come to the border--and even cross it--to request asylum. This is legal. This is a universally standard practice consistent with international treaties that the U.S. has signed. Migrants have a right to seek asylum and nations have an "obligation to help" (per the link).

So not only is enforcement unnecessarily extreme, but if often targets people who are not law breakers in the first place.

3. What path to entry? The notion that "they should come here legally" assumes that there actually is a way to do that.  The implication being that people just chose not do it the legal way, raising concerns as to why they would opt for the “deceitful” route. However, there is almost no legal path to entry for a poor farmer from Mexico or Central America. Further, some citizens from war-torn countries like Colombia do not qualify for refugee status, even though most human rights groups would say they should.

There are many people who need and want to immigrate. There are many businesses that want to hire them. The government should assist this demand by creating pathways, not by interfering. However, the laws are increasingly making it more difficult to immigrate, not less.

Virtually all immigrants would be glad to chose the legal route--if there was one. 

  

4. Respect life or respect the law? If our laws are not just, the human spirit--led by God's grace--will find ways around them to preserve the sanctity of human life. Families are faced with an impossible choice: Either respect the law or cross the border and save the lives of their family. They may face crippling poverty, violence of even death to stay in their home country. What would you do?

The best thing we can do is make sure our laws are just in the first place and enforced with abundant mercy. Many Church traditions (such as the Catholic Church) freely acknowledge that people have the right to migrate, especially when their lives are at stake. It's an expression of the right to life.  Even further, the poverty, violence and political instability which are driving migration are often the direct result of U.S. foreign policy. We reap what we sow.

Slavery was once legal. Both escaping from slavery--as well as helping escaped slaves--were serious crimes. Today, we call the people who participated in the Underground Railroad "heroes." 150 years ago, they were called "illegals." It's astonishing to see the parallels in language and rhetoric between the issues of slavery pre-Civil War and undocumented immigration today. The same terminology was used. Many of the same Scripture verses were used (Romans 13, for example). History is repeating itself.

5. Proven track record of peaceful residence in our communities. The peaceful, law-abiding participation in our communities by undocumented immigrants tells us that their intentions in coming here are truly noble. These are not "criminals" but rather good people who made the best choice in a difficult circumstance.

Undocumented immigrants have been in the US for as long as the U.S. has been in existence. As a whole they pose virtually no national security risk. Today, undocumented immigrants are even convicted of violent crime at substantially lower rates than native-born citizens. 

We should spend our resources tracking down the people who truly are dangerous rather than mercilessly stalking innocent farm workers and their families. Deporting peaceful farm workers and their families is misguided, wasteful, cruel and not likely to make us any safer.

6. Politics of Division. The level of concern is not consistent. There are many “illegals” in the US from Canada and Europe. Few Americans seem worried about that. It’s just the immigration from non-white races and non-Christian religions that seems to be the issue. This suggests that anger over immigration has more to do with xenophobia than it does with national security or concerns over laws.

On top of that, undocumented immigration is lower than it has been in years.  For example, border crossings are only 25% of what they were just a decade ago. They were low long before Trump took office. Many are concerned that the hysteria over immigration is just a red herring designed to find a scapegoat for other problems.

7. Who are we? The situation with immigration says more about who we are as a people than it does about those attempting to migrate. What kind of nation are we? Do we value the creative energy of new people who have a thirst for freedom and an entrepreneurial spirit? Can we justify hoarding our ample land and resources when tired, sick and hungry people are knocking on the door?

I grew up regularly hearing about the Berlin Wall and the Iron Curtain. We in America knew there was much more strength in a free society where people can move about with few restrictions. The USSR imploded when it wasted so many vital resources trying to unnecessarily control its people and cut them off from the ideas, creativity and vitality of the rest of the world. To me, the proposed wall with Mexico is no different than the Berlin Wall, and the Muslim travel ban is not much different than the Iron Curtain restricting movement to and from the Soviet states. Why are we attempting to repeat some of histories greatest mistakes?

Conclusion

Regardless of where you are on the political spectrum, we can probably agree on one thing: We’d all like immigration to happen legally. Nevertheless, the issue of legality does not adequately address the concerns we have today. No law can cover every contingency or possibility. As a result, laws serve as a guideline but should never be taken to a hyper-literal extreme. They need to be enforced with love and mercy.

Just like in the opening example of the hospital, many people use the law to play "gotcha" games with people's lives. Every law is pushed to its limits and beyond to justify cold, quick and harsh exclusion. Why? 

Instead, we should step back and look at the situation as a whole. There are many complex issues in play and the consequences to human lives are serious.

We should reform our system so that it can safely and adequately address current immigration needs and then enforce it only with abundant mercy.