> The idea that illegal immigrants need to be deported (and not have a path to legal residency) comes from a view that those jobs should go to American citizens (which will bring economic pain that is intolerable) or from a view that browns don't belong in the USA.

Doesn't the qualification of them being illegal immigrants imply that they aren't going through the legal processes immigrants should go through to get work and residency?

If illegal immigrants gain the same rights as legal immigrants, why even bother following the rules?

Undocumented immigrants are a useful scapegoat politically, because it allows those in power to point the finger at them for all the country's problems, but those immigrants have no political power themselves since they can't vote.

Additionally, it gives business owners a bunch of workers they can exploit, since those workers can't go to the police or report them to the labor board.

>> The idea that illegal immigrants need to be deported (and not have a path to legal residency) comes from a view that those jobs should go to American citizens

Isn't that obvious? I mean I can't imagine why this would be even remotely controversial.

The Bracero program was ended, but the H-2A visa program for seasonal farm labor remains active, with no numeric cap and hundreds of thousands of visas issued each year. I don't blame workers for making a living, but is there some reason why these business owners requiring seasonal labor could not obtain the proper visa for it?

There are visas for seasonal work and farm work though? J1/j2 afaik?

Just so I understand you:

Advocating for any restrictions on immigration means you are racist?

If not I honestly don’t understand what point you’re making.

Could they not just have fruit picking farms in the south and export it here? I think that will be a win win for everyone. The big losers will be the US farms I guess.

You could imagine a sane policy regime to unwind the "look the other way" approach to illegal immigration and the under-the-table low wage labor market that it created.

Instead we get... well, whatever the fuck this gestapo shit is.

I guess regulatory reform doesn't really play with the kind of people who will gleefully vote for mass deportation on the grounds that they just want immigrants gone.

> and business owners no choice but to keep hiring them.

Um?

> giving migratory workers no choice but to stay illegally

Are you serious? The choice for them was to go back to their home countries.

> The idea that illegal immigrants need to be deported comes from a view that those jobs should go to American citizens or from a view that browns don't belong in the USA.

Or, you know, from the idea that they are doing something illegal and the job of law enforcement is to enforce laws.

[dead]

[flagged]

[flagged]

> it was ended abruptly, giving migratory workers no choice but to stay illegally

Or they could have "moved back south" like you said, and stayed there.

Since this "program" was ended it sounds like it should be as simple as "no papers? gotta go".

Funny how democrats always care so much about "the law" and "due process" until it relates to immigration.

That’s an extreme take. What other laws do you think should be ignored? Traffic laws? Building codes? Tax laws?

A nation is literally defined as an entity that has control over its borders. If it permits just anyone to enter or exit, it is technically not a nation anymore.

I’m all for changing immigration laws, giving more people a legal route to becoming temporary workers, students, residents, and citizens. But being choosy about who gets in and who does not. Attract the best and brightest to lift your country up, not freeloaders and criminals that tear it down. Look at the riots in Europe right now - and learn from their mistakes. Immigration is good but there have to be limits, laws, and control over borders.