I’ve seen poverty abroad. I’ve seen four-year-olds running between stopped cars on an eight-lane avenue, begging for money. I’ve seen a mother with a baby strapped to her back, sitting in the hot sun selling gum for a few precious pesos a day. I’ve seen the shacks that pass for houses. I’ve seen Central American immigrants walking through the countryside (making their way to the U.S. border) with nothing but a thin rolled-up sleeping bag on their backs.
President Barack Obama speaks at the White House June 23, 2016 in Washington, DC. The Supreme Court announced that it was evenly divided in a case concerning Obama's controversial executive actions on immigration. (Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images)
The long and short of it is that I can understand two things very well: First, I can technically “understand” why people break the law to come here illegally, and second, I can technically “understand” why the Supreme Court's ruling on President Obama’s 2014 executive amnesty actions prompted such emotional reaction from illegal immigrants.
Here’s a quick rundown for those of you unaware of what the Supreme Court ruling on immigration means: In a 4-4 decision, the Supreme Court ruling allows a lower court ruling to stand. That lower court ruling was the result of 26 states suing to stop Obama’s extra-Congressional action on immigration and long story short, it “blocked the administration’s unilateral policy of refusing to pursue the deportation of millions of illegal aliens” while case moved upwards to the Supreme Court. So basically, President Obama doesn’t exactly get his way … for now. Though rule of law’s never been much of an impediment anyway, so we’ll see.
Here’s what I don’t understand: these are people who came here escaping situations created by oppressive and utterly corrupt governments, right? So—explain to me again why it’s a good thing to cheer on an American president as he skirts the Constitution to arbitrarily give amnesty to illegal aliens? As one writer aptly put it, “the remedy for lawlessness is not lawlessness.”
But what I really want to talk about today isn’t the court ruling itself, or how it will now go back to Texas where litigation will continue, or even the meat of the executive actions themselves.
I want to talk about broken records, such as the ones the president had on replay during his Thursday reaction to the Supreme Court Ruling:
Broken Record: America is Supposed to Accept Everyone, Because We’re A Nation of Immigrants
As he pointed out once again that we’re a “nation of immigrants,” Obama said that “our Founders conceived of this country as a refuge for the world.”
He’s right in a sense—people came here to escape tyranny in Europe. But here’s the reality: the American Revolution and the birth of this nation was a gory, horrendous affair. Our paid for this “refuge” with their lives and sacred honor. And because of that, many of our Founders were pretty vocal with “their concerns publicly and routinely about the effects of indiscriminate mass immigration.”
Michele Malkin writes:
“They made it clear that the purpose of allowing foreigners into our fledgling nation was not to recruit millions of new voters or to secure permanent ruling majorities for their political parties. It was to preserve, protect, and enhance the republic they put their lives on the line to establish.”
In sum, they didn’t want their blood sacrifice to be squandered by people who weren’t interested in what it meant (nor cared about maintaining it).
Broken Record: Immigration is About Compassion
Are we a compassionate nation? Absolutely. Just take a look around the world.
Is immigration supposed to be about compassion? Absolutely not. No—immigration was supposed to benefit the country by bringing in more like-minded (read: agrees with the values that set the country apart), members of society. It was never supposed to be about a no-holds-barred invitation to the entire world. Stop and think about that—does that even make logical sense?
Any halts to immigration were supposed to be based on whether or not those immigrants would contribute to society or be a danger to the framework that made this country so different.
And before you bring it up, that little ditty on the bottom of the Statue of Liberty - the misinterpretation of which has weaseled itself into actual public policy - is not a call for the United States to be the world’s soup kitchen. It was a challenge to the world. As I wrote a while back: “You stuffed shirts, you and your tyrannical paths have failed. Now give us the people you’ve all but destroyed and just watch what we’ll do with them!”
Broken Record: Enforcing Immigration Will Separate Families
“We’re going to have to decide whether we’re a people who accept the cruelty of ripping children from their parents’ arms -- or whether we actually value families, and keep them together for the sake of all of our communities,” said the president on Thursday.
Take this story of the Soza family of Nicaragua. Ronald and Marisela Soza illegally immigrated to the United States with their daughter, and later had a son here. Marisela was eventually deported, and Ronald stayed behind in the U.S with the couple’s two children. The children came home one day to find that Ronald was also eventually deported as well—but not after quite a momentous effort on the part of ICE:
“Soza was arrested last year and was allowed to return home under certain conditions, such as attending appointments with immigration authorities. But while under supervision, Soza committed 39 violations, including failure to attend appointments with immigration authorities, according to ICE.”
It’s not a matter of just “poof,” and mom and dad are gone. In this case—like so many others—they made decisions. They made a decision not to return with Marisela. Ronald made a decision to commit 39 violations (39!!) even after he was allowed to return home to his children. Ronald made a decision to fail to attend immigration appointments.
But above and beyond all this, this one’s critical: they made a decision to come here illegally. And yet we’re still sitting here talking about how it’s cruel to enforce laws they made a decision to break in the first place.
…And last but certainly not least:
Broken Record: You Don’t Agree With Me, So You’re A Racist
This is the notion that if you’re for the rule of law, you must thereby be bigoted, racist, or otherwise scared stiff of anyone who doesn’t look, act, eat, talk, or pray like you.
But don’t let me put words in the president’s mouth. Let me let him be clear:
“We don't have to wall ourselves off from those who may not look like us right now or pray like we do or have a different last name. … What makes us Americans [is] our shared commitment to an ideal that all of us are created equal, all of us have a chance to make of our lives what we will."
No, Mr. President. This has squat to do with WHO is coming, and rather with whether or not you have the Constitutional authority to take action at all. This has everything to do with the rule of law. We’re not afraid of people who look different. We’re sick and tired of people break our laws.
And on that note, let me take you back to something we talked about at the beginning: people are coming here to escape the squalor and violence that corrupt, arbitrary governments have fed, right? They’re coming here because this country represents something different, right?
So here’s a thought: let’s not encourage our president to let us become no different.
Mary Ramirez is a full-time writer, creator of www.afuturefree.com (a political commentary blog), and contributor to The Chris Salcedo Show (TheBlaze Radio Network, Saturday, from noon to 3 p.m. ET). She can be reached at: firstname.lastname@example.org; or on Twitter: @AFutureFree
TheBlaze contributor channel supports an open discourse on a range of views. The opinions expressed in this channel are solely those of each individual author.