Versión Español
Yesterday DNC chair Tom Perez addressed a gathering of workers’ and immigrants’ rights groups in front of the White House, sharing a refrain often repeated by the social justice warrior crowd: “No human being is illegal.” Perez, who narrowly bested Bernie Sanders-backed Minnesota Congressman Keith Ellison in the race to head the DNC, is the former Secretary of Labor in the Obama administration. The emergence of a Perez/Ellison horse race is an indication of just how radicalized the base of the Democratic party has become in the wake of Trump.
To the hard left of the Democratic party, borders are an injustice, attempting to enforce and control them is racist, and anyone who wants has the inherent right to immigrate to the United States. In this socialist fantasy world, it would be a grave injustice to deny anyone the opportunity to enter the US and take advantage of its extremely generous social safety net. In this Orwellian fantasy world of politically incorrect thought crimes, it becomes socially unacceptable to even ascribe the accurate terms “illegal” and “immigrant” to a human being.
- Read More: To Solve the Immigration Conflict in the US, Just Look to the Constitution
- Read More: Three Myths that Distort US Debate on Immigration
The fundamental problem with the mantra, “No human being is illegal” is that it is inherently untrue. Human beings are subject to the laws, rules, and regulations of the sovereign nation in which they are located. It is their moral, legal, and ethical responsibility to obey those laws. To suggest that the rule of law is subject to the interpretation of those who wish to violate it, will lead us down the slippery slope towards anarchy and chaos.
Immigration law applies to all human beings, whether the American Left chooses to acknowledge it, or not. American citizens are also subject to rigorous enforcement of immigration laws. Brazil, Russia, India, and China, for example, all have difficult and burdensome requirements merely to apply for a tourist visa. When I applied for a visa to Brazil, for example, I was required to prove that I would not become an economic burden on the Brazilian state, and to show 6 months of bank statements proving substantial financial resources. Brazil, as a sovereign nation, has the absolute right to set their own immigration rules and regulations, as does the United States.
Tom Perez’s suggestion that we can disregard the laws that we don’t like is a dangerous one. Illegal immigrants have no right to be in the United States, neither morally nor legally. A new generation of social justice warriors has emerged, advocating a radical ideology of victimhood. In their twisted logic, citizens from economically deprived nations are “victims” who have the fundamental “right” to come to the United States regardless of what immigration law has to say about it.
To the Democratic party nothing would be more delightful than mass immigration from third world countries: the more people relying on government social safety nets, and receiving free taxpayer-funded education, healthcare, food, housing, and transportation, the better. After all, today’s penniless third world immigrant is tomorrow’s most loyal Democratic voter.
Fundamentally, socialism and mass illegal immigration are the perfect partners in crime.
During his eight year presidency, Barack Obama repeatedly and flagrantly refused to enforce American immigration law, or enforce our southern border, to the delight of hard-left Latino activists, who constitute a key power base in the Democratic Party.
The Democratic establishment was shocked on November 8, when Trump won nearly a third of Latino votes. How could this happen? How could a man who had antagonized the Latino community so, perform better with the Latino community than moderate Mitt Romney?
The answer is that the American Latino community is hardly monolithic. There are plenty of conservative, libertarian, and moderate Latino voters, in addition to the Tom Perezes of the world. The Latino community is also hardly monolithic with regard to immigration. In fact, a recent poll by Pulse Opinion Research demonstrates that Latinos are also extremely concerned about unchecked immigration: “Of likely Hispanic voters, 51 percent responded that efforts to enforce the law have been “too little”, compared to 38 percent who indicated that it was ‘too much’ or ‘just right’.”
That hardly seems to bolster Perez’s contention that “no human being is illegal.” Nor does it bode well for Democrats’ attempts to use immigration as a wedge issue to boost Latino turnout for Democratic candidates.
Illegal immigration presents serious problems for society. It drives down the wages of American workers. It funds murderous human trafficking networks who control migratory routes through Central America and Mexico. It outrageously strains American education, healthcare, judiciary, transportation, and infrastructure, as millions of illegal immigrants use public services but pay little to no taxes to fund them.
Under Article II of the Constitution, it is the president who has the authority to regulate immigration in the United States, a view that has been consistently upheld by the Supreme Court. The Trump administration is currently under siege by liberal activist judges, many based in the 9th Circuit, who seek to make, rather than interpret, the laws, in subversion of American Constitutional order.
So, sorry Tom. Yes, it is not illegal to be a human being. But, no. You are fundamentally incorrect to suggest that “no human being is illegal.” Immigration laws and borders are real and legitimate and sovereign nations have every right to enforce them, despite what the hardcore liberal activists and social justice warriors heading up the Democratic Party may say.
Discussion about this post