When Kids Show Up at Our Borders

In pondering immigration policy, it's sometimes useful to keep in mind that we are, after all, talking about human beings.

BorderU.S. CongressAn undocumented foreigner crossed the Rio Grande near Hidalgo, Texas, the other day. He had spent three weeks traveling from Honduras, and he was carrying only one thing with him: a birth certificate. He was hoping to find relatives in San Antonio or Maryland. His name is Alejandro, and he's 8 years old.

His story and photo appeared in The New York Times, providing a stark reminder that illegal immigration often involves harmless individuals who are guilty of nothing. From the angry reaction to the surge of unaccompanied minors and mothers with young children crossing the border in recent weeks, you might just forget that.

Recently Murrieta, Calif., Mayor Alan Long denounced the transfer of undocumented immigrants to a local facility, and a city councilman worried that, as The Desert Sun reported, "the immigrant families would bring disease and crime." Between 200 and 300 protesters formed a human wall to block buses carrying the foreigners. That's not a big turnout for a city of more than 100,000.

Fox News fed the fears with a lurid story on its website quoting unnamed sources who said children housed at a Texas Air Force base had measles, chicken pox, scabies, not to mention that "lice would just be climbing down their hair."

Of course, lice are not unique to these youngsters; the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says that "6 million to 12 million infestations occur each year in the United States among children 3 to 11 years of age." But accusing foreigners of bringing disease and filth is a favorite tactic of nativists.

Much of the reaction stems from motives that are anything but pure. One protester in Murrieta told CNN, "I just wish America would be America again because it's not, and it's not just pointed to the Hispanics."

But there has indeed been a tide of arrivals that badly strain the government's ability to handle them. Republicans blame it on President Barack Obama. Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott accused him of "policies that entice children to navigate more than a thousand miles away from home, going through the most treacherous conditions, facing things like human trafficking and sexual assault." By this, he presumably had in mind the administration's deferral of deportation of some children brought here illegally by their parents ("Dreamers").

One thing critics ignore is the federal law that expanded protections for children who may be victims of human trafficking—signed by President George W. Bush. "Longer processing times created by the 2008 act mean longer wait times for the minors in immigration detention facilities," writes Cato Institute analyst Alex Nowrasteh. The result has been more kids than places to house them.

U.S. law calls for immediate deportation of children from Mexico who are apprehended at the border—but forbids it for minors from other countries. Their fate is ultimately up to immigration judges.

The claim that Obama's action to help Dreamers unleashed the flood is plausible but unproven. It's entirely possible that smugglers try to drum up business by telling parents that kids who make it here will be allowed to stay. But presidents can hardly design policies based on how they may be distorted by self-seeking felons.

Experts say other factors predominate. The Migration Policy Institute says kids are coming "to escape violence, abuse, persecution, trafficking and economic deprivation." Caitlin Sanderson, program director at the Esperanza Immigrant Rights Project in Los Angeles, told The Washington Post her staff has talked to some 600 unaccompanied children about why they came and said, "I have not come upon one intake form that says, 'because of a rumor that says I can stay here.'"

Of the five countries with the highest murder rates in the world, four are in Central America. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees found that nearly half of the children interviewed said they had been harmed or threatened by criminals.

The flow of foreigners would be more predictable if our immigration laws provided more avenues for those who want to come here. If you block off legal avenues for desperate people, they will find illegal ones. Even a huge expansion in the border enforcement has failed to change that elemental reality.

The surge of kids is a logistical and humanitarian challenge, but not a dangerous wave of pestilential predators and vermin. In pondering immigration policy, it's sometimes useful to keep in mind that we are, after all, talking about human beings.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Ted S.||

    Immigrants. Check.

    Now we need articles on pot, and ass-sex.

  • Drake||

    It's call buggery, show some class.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Don't be that guy.

  • EDG reppin' LBC||

    No one wants to be that guy. But there does seem to be a pattern with Reason. And pretty much the rest of the day will be immigrants, weed, and gays.

  • EDG reppin' LBC||

    Or maybe they'll throw in Postrel postulating on glamour? ;-)

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    It's the weekly The Perfidy of the Yankee day over at Lew's Place, if that's more your speed.

  • Swiss Servator, CH verlort :(||

    Perfidy of the Yankee? I thought it was Albion that was "perfidious".

    We need a new term for Teh Northrun Aggressorz!

  • MJGreen||

    Why won't they write more about Obamacare or Lois Lerner or my particular hobbyhorse?? God, Reason is insufferable!

  • BambiB||

    This is ass-sex on something stronger than pot.

    Foreigners invade the country and we aren't shooting them at the border? That's the problem. And Reason is all for the drugged-up ass-rape of American citizens?

  • Longtorso, Johnny||

    What happens is govt raises them to be Dem voters and portions them out to states they want flipped in 15 years.

  • tarran||

    Given that 99% of votes go to either the Democratic or the Republican parties, which judging by how they govern agree on 99% of government policies, I find your fear, and the resulting support for the gross violation of human rights that is immigration control depressing.

    You literally are abandoning the morally correct principles to gain nothing.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    People act like this is somehow novel. Tammany Hall started 225 years ago. And we all know the effects of massive Irish immigration to fuel the Democratic political machine.

  • DJF||

    So lets learn from our past mistakes, not repeat them.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    "I got mine", eh?

  • DJF||

    Better then acting like those who lost last time

  • Lady Bertrum||

    What didn't exist during the Tammany Hall period: WIC, SChip, Food Stamps, Medicaid, O-Care.

    There were not publically funded social welfare programs.

  • ||

    There were not publically funded social welfare programs.


    Not really true. The difference is that the "public" that funded them were city and county governments, rather that the Federal government.

    Tammany used relief money every bit as much as city jobs to buy votes.

  • KPres||

  • UnCivilServant||

    Both my sympathy and capacity for empathy have burned out from years of it being manditory. Life isn't fair, send them home.

  • ||

    ^This^

    I live at the end of a dead end road in a rural parish. For a couple of years people would drop off dogs they did not want near my house. Eventually I found myself caring for 9 dogs. Food, vet bills, chewed up furniture....

    It wasn't the dogs fault. Some of them were really good dogs, but I just can't save the whole world. I finally put a stop to it. I suppose they drop them somewhere else now.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    I suppose they drop them somewhere else now.

    I'm guessing Villalobos?

  • On The Road To Mandalay||

    Suthenboy,

    You must live in Louisiana. Are you a cajun?

  • sarcasmic||

    Sympathy is just a word in the dictionary between shit and syphilis.

  • Daniel||

    There is a right way and a wrong way to handle immigration. Our process needs reform to more efficiently evaluate immigrant applicants. That would be the right way.
    Merely opening our borders to anyone is the wrong way. The problem is that the current administration advertised that they would take children without question, of course the parents that can't provide for them will send them.
    This administration is fully guilty of enabling this problem, most likely, for political reasons.....

  • tarran||

    My guess is that it's sampling bias; the administration has been doing a record number of deportations... of adults.

    If one deports the adults more efficiently, but not the kids, the population distribution of the detention centers will skew towards having a higher proportion of children.

    Of course the administration could do something as stupid as encouraging kids to make the dangerous trek with no guardians to increase poli t I called pressure in favor of their "reform". They are depraved enough to think that way. I can, however, see how the current situation could develop without such a cynical maneuver.

  • Drake||

    I thought the Administration did encourage the wave of children - with winks and nods and talk of amnesty.

  • DJF||

    Obama has done more then just winks and nods, he has administratively implemented his own Dream Act where illegal’s under 18 are not deported

  • DJF||

    High deportation figures are misleading

    http://www.latimes.com/nation/.....tml#page=1

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Thank you for the cite. However, isn't the Obama's administration definition more accurate?

    Until recent years, most people caught illegally crossing the southern border were simply bused back into Mexico in what officials called "voluntary returns," but which critics derisively termed "catch and release."

    What was once called "voluntary return" sounds like "deportation" to me. Why wasn't it called as such before now?

  • DJF||

    Because no legal deporation hearing or ruling occured.

  • Taggart||

    Because it's not a deportation. The patrol simply lets them go at the border, the aliens walk over, and hen the next day they come back. And then the Border Patrol catches them again, returns them again, and again they come back the next day....until, eventually, they make it through to the interior.

  • Taggart||

    They did this because they do not have the resources to deport everyone they catch. They'd deport you after they caught you five or six times, or if you were suspected of some criminal activity or something - but everyone else they just voluntarily return. Because otherwise you have what you have now - people sitting in camps for months, cooped up, getting sick, waiting for process.

  • DJF||

    “”””the administration has been doing a record number of deportations... of adults.”””

    No they have not. They just combined two previously separate numbers, people stopped at the border and turned around and people deported. The total number has been dropping throughout Obama’s administration

  • Drake||

    Sure, process applicants efficiently and turn around people you don't want at the border.

    This process of holding people for months in camps, then busing them to random locations is a total circus.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    This process of holding people for months in camps, then busing them to random locations is a total

    Dry run for all "the continuity of government" plans like Rex 84.

  • On The Road To Mandalay||

    Daniel,

    Don't forget that in this case, the security of our border with Mexico is one issue, and how to deal with all of those illegal "immigrants" who have crossed the that border with impunity and immunity, are to be delay with. Unless the border is militarized, the number of illegals will increase. Ask a medic if he/she is going to stop serious bleeding with a fucking bandaid.

  • SIV||

    One thing critics ignore is the federal law that expanded protections for children who may be victims of human trafficking—signed by President George W. Bush

    'Baggers blame the Black Man and "the things we do together" when, like everything else that goes wrong, it's all Bush's fault.

  • DJF||

    """"When Kids Show Up at Our Borders""""

    They get taxpayer paid for welfare?

    Remember even though they pretend to be charities, organizations like Catholic Charities and Save the Children get paid by the taxpayers to provide for these kids. These organizations are just government contractors who are paid to provide this ‘charity”

  • Gilbert Martin||

    "His story and photo appeared in The New York Times, providing a stark reminder that illegal immigration often involves harmless individuals who are guilty of nothing"

    Whether someone else is guilty of something or not has no bearing on whether the citizens of the United States have any obligation to take care of them.

    All of these other countries are using the United States as a safety valve to offload the effects of their own corrupt and incompetent policies on us. If we continue to accomodate them indefinitely, they will never have any incentive to reform their own countries.

  • lap83||

    "All of these other countries are using the United States as a safety valve to offload the effects of their own corrupt and incompetent policies on us. If we continue to accommodate them indefinitely, they will never have any incentive to reform their own countries."

    Good point.

  • OneOut||

    And if we truly shut down the border there would probably be real revolution, or at least social chaos, in some of these countries to the south of US.

    Then we would see a real wave of refugees stampeding across the border.

    Also, I wonder how much effect our WAR ON DRUGS has on the crime rates and government corruption down south ?

  • Rhywun||

    I'm sure it has the same effect as in the US - greatly magnifies it.

  • Faceless Commenter||

    How far are we supposed to think things out? What about we act like a normal nation with borders and we face up that nations aren't supposed to imitate Christ?

  • Slammer||

    "When Kids Show Up at Our Borders".

    There's a border?

  • EDG reppin' LBC||

    Yeah there's a border. It's over by the food court, next to the Old Navy.

  • DJF||

    Borders went out of business.

  • OneOut||

    SO says the Prez.

  • On The Road To Mandalay||

    WHY?

  • Hawkman||

    Then we should enforce Barnes and Noble instead.

  • Lord Humungus||

    some imaginary line ... or something like that.

  • John||

    This is a good example of Chapman being a stupid white person. In most of the world kids are a burden. If word gets out, and apparently in Latin America at least word has that you can get rid of your unwanted kids by sending them to the US boarder, we will be deluged with unwanted children.

  • Joe_C||

    I just wish America would be America again, and accept people who immigrate. Because we don't. And we used to.

  • Joe_C||

    And before anyone complains, I'm for a drastically more efficient immigration process, not for completely open borders. But I don't think anyone should be denied without cause. As long as they pay their taxes and actually work, I'm good.

  • DJF||

    We don't require people in the US to do that, why would immigrants do it?

  • RonnieNM||

    Do you mean a cause that they have or a cause that we have? A country can have many valid causes for not wanting to increase the flow of immigration and I think US is in that position right now.

  • Bling Boy||

    We allow more immigrants in than any other country in the world. You are clueless.

  • MWG||

    Not as a percentage of the overall population. You are clueless

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L.....population

  • ||

    Not really, since those are two completely different measurements, and he's 100% correct - we allow in more people than any other country in the world. The fact that we have a very large population and that most of the rest of the world with similar or larger populations are pretty restrictionist is an interesting point, but doesn't refute the original statement. As the chart you linked makes pretty clear, America has by far the largest immigrant population in absolute terms, and nearly 4 times as many of the world's total immigrants as the next closes competitor.

  • CharlotteHaze||

    We not only allow more immigrants than any other country, but we allow more now than at any point in US history.

    As for your "percentage of population" remark: why is this pertinent, why should US immigration policy reflect the plot of Seven Brides for Seven Brothers?

  • On The Road To Mandalay||

    Joe,

    Yes, those were the days when people came into places like Ellis Island, LEGALLY! Also places like Angel Island on our West Coast. What is so special about immigrants from Spanish-speaking countries? Do they get some sort of special pass because they are Hispanic? Why did my ancestors have to arrive in this country from Europe, LEGALLY, when these people just come across our southern border, because things are bad in Mexico and points south. Things were bad in Europe when my ancestors came over here LEGALLY.

  • ||

    Why did my ancestors have to arrive in this country from Europe, LEGALLY...

    Because back then virtually all prospective immigration was legal.

  • Faceless Commenter||

    And how well developed was the welfare state back then?

  • On The Road To Mandalay||

    MikeP

    Obviously. I was not asking a question. I was making a sarcastic statement.

  • ||

    But your sarcastic statement hides an underlying truth: Make virtually all prospective immigration legal today and everyone you complain about will arrive LEGALLY.

  • CharlotteHaze||

    "Back then"? Back WHEN?! My people came from the old country between the late 1920's - mid 1950's.

    Believe me, there were immigration laws to obey-- earlier arrivals had to "sponsor" the newcomers; if the latter couldn't support themselves here, the sponsorship money would have been forfeited for the purpose of paying their passage back from whence they came.

  • ||

    Are you and On The Road To Mandalay the same person?

    Because I was responding to the comment of On The Road To Mandalay, whose ancestors sound like they immigrated before the government commenced wholesale abrogation of migration rights under the Progressive Era acts of 1921 and 1924.

  • avocats||

    Do you mean accept anyone who shows up? Or accept anyone who files papers and obeys the laws? Because the latter are more than welcome.

  • Hawkman||

    If you fill the country with third world barbarians then you become a third world barbaric country.

    Just look at what letting in all of those Irish and Italians did.

  • AlgerHiss||

    "we are, after all, talking about human beings"

    Tell that to the source of the problem: The stinky little Hell-hole countries from where they came. Which contains sorry-assed cultures that keep them living a life that sucks.

    A bologna sandwich and a bus ride right back to where they came from will have me sleeping just fine.

    This issue is like watching us commit suicide.

  • On The Road To Mandalay||

    Alger Hiss,

    I strongly believe in peanut butter and jelly sandwiches and som bottled water. Which reminds me of that Congressional Hearing I saw where the head of our Border Patrol said that a hugh problem was Central American Gangs coming across the Border, and especially in the South Rio Grande Valley area between Mexico and Texas. Again, my premise, that if the Border were properly SEALED, it would be much more difficult. Our Armed Forces (ALL) could be used to defend our borders.

  • Polarbar||

    Yes! Being our troops home and let them perform their Constituional job, protect our borders. And, reform immigration so legal immigration is much faster easier.

  • Rich||

    In pondering immigration policy, it's sometimes useful to keep in mind that we are, after all, talking about human beings

    Well, ... OK.

    But only in pondering *immigration policy*.

  • Swiss Servator, Alles Klar||

    So is the rest of Central America adopting José de la Cruz Porfirio Díaz Mori's lament?

    "¡Pobre México! ¡Tan lejos de Dios y tan cerca de los Estados Unidos!" (Poor Mexico, so far from God and so close to the United States!)

  • On The Road To Mandalay||

    And your point is?

  • creech||

    How many busloads of these children showed up in Hollywood or
    Beverly Hills or the Upper East Side? There, I'm sure, there would be no ugly demonstrations. Plenty of room for tents on the estates of tv and movie bigshots, no?

  • Tonio||

    They are not being dumped in tent-cities, they are being transported to where there are facilities. For some reason a group of immigrants is being bused in to Virginia which is pretty far from the Mexican border, but apparently there is an empty facility here.

  • MikePercy||

    Where they are processed and released pending some future hearing. In the meantime, they are potentially an additional burden on the welfare state. And they usually eschew returning for their scheduled hearing with little chance of ever being caught (again).

    And this is well known both by the Administration and the illegal aliens, indeed it is counted upon. It's not a bug, it's a feature.

  • GlobalPoliticalAwakening||

    Behind the endless throngs of desperate Central American children arriving on the U.S. border and a steady wave of illegal immigrants from Mexico and beyond is a covert plan for global economic warfare — those building up the world of globalization are tearing down the sovereignty and financial strength of the United States and Europe to make way for the coming corporate new world order.

    A generation of sending American jobs offshore under NAFTA, GATT and the WTO, dumping cheap corn on Mexico thereby destroying millions of farming jobs and unleashing disruptive retailers like Wal-Mart upon the fragile economies of Latin America have created turmoil, uncertainty and rivers of human migration… and along with it bitter tension and discord over the dynamics of immigration, illegal immigration and the struggle for a lasting standard of living under the New World Order.

    The globalist plan to wreck our national sovereignty has been unfolding for awhile now…things are just speeding up in recent months.

    Aaron Dykes lays out his research in the video below to illustrate what’s actually going on right now with the full globalist plan behind this “sudden” (read: planned) so-called “humanitarian crisis” emerging on the U.S.-Mexico border. It’s all part of instituting a new world order. http://globalpoliticalawakenin.....is-on.html

  • On The Road To Mandalay||

    GlobalPoliticalAwakening,

    In Europe the human "invasion" is coming up from North Africa, again. Historically speaking, it is a re invasion of the Muslims.

  • TommyInIdaho||

    When someone enters the country in violation of our immigration laws he's done something wrong. You can argue an eight-year old's capacity to understand the legality might be less than that of an adult but if he were sneaking into Old Man Carruthers' field to kipe watermelons we'd hold him responsible.

    How is it Reason-able to sugar-coat the nature of the act of entering the country illegally?

  • MJGreen||

    The same way they're able to sugar-coat the nature of selling dope, even though that violates "our" laws.

  • MWG||

    When a black person sits at the front of the bus in violation of our laws, he's done something wrong!

  • avocats||

    God help us. We are doomed with people like this.

  • Shrug||

    "How is it Reason-able to sugar-coat the nature of the act of entering the country illegally?"

    "Illegal" is not synonymous with "Wrong" nor is "Legal" synonymous with "Right."

    I would rather do what is right, than just do what is legal.

  • MikePercy||

    How many illegal aliens are staying at your house?

    I know that charity and goodwill means seeing a man in need and inviting him into my home for food and shelter.

    But if the same man crawls through an open window and helps himself to the contents of my pantry and trashes my home and starts demanding that I accommodate him, then calling the police and hoping he goes to jail is not a crime against humanity.

    It behooves us all to distinguish between lawful Hispanic immigrants and illegal border-jumpers.

    Anyone, no matter what race or original nationality, who comes to this country legally; who strives for citizenship; who embraces our language & culture while respecting their own traditions; who wants to help keep this country great--I welcome him with open arms and call him a fellow American. Those who sneak into this country illegally; who break immigration, employment, tax, zoning and even basic traffic laws on a daily basis; who reject our culture and retreat into barrios; who demand taxpayer-funded social services not even available to citizens in good standing--I have little sympathy for them and their "plight".

  • ||

    How many illegal aliens are staying at your house?

    None. But it sounds like a lot must be staying at yours. I suggest you ask them to leave and prosecute them if they're actually breaking in.

    Just don't abrogate the rights of others to transport, house, or employ them as they see fit.

  • RonnieNM||

    "The flow of foreigners would be more predictable if our immigration laws provided more avenues for those who want to come here. If you block off legal avenues for desperate people, they will find illegal ones."

    Efficiency in evaluating immigration applications, yes. More avenues? Meh. The idea that we have to accommodate people who want to come here lest we have illegals is absurd and as far as massive expansion of border patrol - I'm just not seeing it. The fact that the first border patrol checkpoint at home is in San Clemente from the I-5 and Temecula from the 15 is ridiculous - not to mention the fact that I can't remember the last time they were actually stopping people to search cars. Yes, we're talking about people - but there's no reason why the United States can't make immigration policy more restrictive when internal needs call for it. Today, our internal economic and political climate calls for more restrictive immigration policy.

  • Tonio||

    And if the anti-(illegal-)immigration activists really wanted to do something useful here they'd be buying billboards in Guatemala (etc) informing people that there is no free pony. Srsly.

  • MegaloMonocle||

    they'd be buying billboards in Guatemala (etc) informing people that there is no free pony.

    As things stand, that would be a lie. Unfortunately.

  • Stoic||

    The U.S. helped create the gang problems in Central America. http://www.latimes.com/local/l.....tml#page=1

  • On The Road To Mandalay||

    Stoic,

    You must be talking about our policies in Central America during the 1980s? (Not to mention our interference there many years before that). True or not true, and to what degree, this still does NOT excuse our failure to secure our border with Mexico.

  • Stoic||

    Actually, I was referring to more recent history, as indicated by the article I linked to that is from 2005. Basically, California (probably other states as well, but this particular article is about California) deported violent gang members rather than holding them in prison. The idea was to rid California of the gangs, but it backfired in that what were previously localized gangs are now major international criminal organizations.

  • avocats||

    It's not our obligation to keep criminal illegals in our prisons, sorry. And no one asked them to return again and again. This is beyond bogus. And the fact that the people of the affected countries are sitting there like sheep, taking no action--that's our fault as well? How about they stop having kids if the environment is so toxic? They're smart enough to know how to play the illegal immigration game but not enough for birth control?

  • avocats||

    What? Are you kidding?

  • On The Road To Mandalay||

    The situation south of our border with Mexico is NOT the fault of The United States of American, although more than a few sob sisters would invite us to think so. Yes, the plight of little children is sad. However, the failure of our weak-minded politicians to fortify (seal and militarize) our border has produced (and will continue to produce) threats far greater than lice. Obviously, this would be the drug cartels that run Mexico. Combine that with the sex traffic, and the continued exploitation of cheap labor, plus the illegal/unregistered arms trade, spells DISASTER. Will the border ever be properly (use your imagination) protected? Probably not. Why? Because most of our politicians really don't give a damn about the safety and security of the U.S. They want the Hispanic vote, and fear being called racists if they dared to talk about sealing the border. I would not at all be surprised if many of them are being paid off. After all, drugs are a multi-billion dollar industry. Seal the damn border, or shut the fuck up about this issue, to include immigration "reform". What the hell are our glorious leaders going to do with all those millions of people they allowed to slip over the border?

  • Christophe||

    Just open the fucking border up and give up on the drug war (legalize everything).

    Human trafficking and Mexican cartels solved in one go.

    You're welcome.

  • Anon E. Mouse||

    Yes, what could possibly go wrong with allowing millions of unemployed, unskilled laborers to freely enter the country, while simultaneously allowing our own citizens to lie about in a drug-induced stupor at will? Fucking idiocy. You're welcome.

  • Christophe||

    Oh, it's our resident NSA booster, demonstrating there's not a single act of violence by the state he doesn't support.

    Also, 1965 is when we started stopping Mexicans from coming over to work. We know what possibly goes wrong with open borders and it's not a whole lot.

    Same goes for the drug war, although prohibition was rolled in more gradually, starting with SF's opium smoking bans in 1875.

    You don't get to appeal to fear of the unknown when talking about policies that were the law of the land for centuries.

  • On The Road To Mandalay||

    Christophe,

    Hardly a solution. The defeatist attitude of assholes such as yourself, is one of the reasons this problem is not resolved.

  • Baron Von Weinermobile||

    Actually, Christophe is closer to being right than you or Anon. I worked for years in one of the roughest shitholes you can imagine on the border. Most Americans who think they know what's going on down there don't know he half of it, even the people who live on the border. The violence is staggering. Sealing the border is impossible. The military is lost down there. They are not trained or equipped to do the job. The only solution is to make non-immigrant work visas available for all who want them and don't have a criminal record. After so many years in good status allow them to apply for LAPR status.

  • On The Road To Mandalay||

    Lets just say that The Mexican-American War of 1846-1848 has come home to roost. Blame the whole fucking mess on James Polk and Manifest Destiny, and the results of a border that is not really a border.

  • MegaloMonocle||

    the results of a border that is not really a border.

    For the Texas part, at least, its a pretty good border, what with the major river that defines it.

    The Western stretch? Pretty arbitrary, but no worse than the Canadian border.

  • MikePercy||

    Indeed. And if millions of uneducated, low-skilled "workers" were flowing in from Canada and taxing (pardon the pun) the welfare state and exacerbating unemployment, I'd be saying the same thing I am about the inflow from the southern border.

    But at least probably I wouldn't be called a racist.

  • On The Road To Mandalay||

    That River (The Rio Grande) between Texas and Mexico should be patrolled by our expanded Coast Guard, with shoot to kill orders. You can be sure it is already patrolled by the fucking Mexican drug cartels.

  • Baron Von Weinermobile||

    what a stupid comment. what about all the people who live on that river? you think they will enjoy living under a military occupation? you ever shoot anyone manadalay? you ever even been to the border?

  • Frozen Costume||

    Desperate Children Are At Our Border Seeking Asylum. Immigration Reform Should Allow Them To Stay.

  • MegaloMonocle||

    Immigration Reform Should Allow Them To Stay Provide for Prompt Repatriation.

  • avocats||

    Wow. Do you now have a sharing agreement with HuffPo?

    Just one point out of hundreds that could be made:

    Each of the 58,000 kids to date will cost local school districts $120,000 apiece to educate. My calculator keeps telling me that's almost $7 billion. But, sure, it's fine to "make" immigration policy this way.

  • On The Road To Mandalay||

    Failure to seal the border between Mexico and the United States of America is (again) the fault of American politicians who are afraid to advocate this (and act on it) because they fear they will not get the Hispanic Vote. I suspect a great many of them are also being paid off by the cartels. In any event, their failure to act is close to treason. These politicians are Federal, State, and Local. The only solution to this is to militarize the border. That must be done before we can even begin to deal with all the illegals who are already in the country. What a bunch of weak-minded assholes these politicians are.

  • Baron Von Weinermobile||

    durp durp durp durp
    so sick of hearing armchair rambos talk about militarizing the border. you have no friggin idea what you are talking about. aside from costing a fortune, it would be pointless. at last in texas this would mean seizing huge amounts of private land or permanently stationing troops on peoples farms and backyards. heavy equipment cannot access major sections of river. that means foot patrols, in which they will encounter USC's on a daily basis. people out jogging or fishing with their kids. people who look mexican and may not speak english, and yet are every bit as american as you. Are you saying that these people should have to submit to daily demands to show their papers?

  • Great+Grandma||

    Inform the countries from where these children came that the children will be flown back and to be ready to receive them and take them back to their families. If this is done just once. There will be no more unaccompanied children at the border.

  • Great+Grandma||

    Good grief! Wake up Steve! All the excuses in the world do not mitigate the fact that these are illegal alien children who should not have been sent here unaccompanied and even though we are compassionate, these children should be sent back to their parents whose job it is to care for them.

    To keep the children sends a message that we welcome unaccompanied children. We certainly do not want children put in extreme danger by their parents so they can bypass our laws.

    Besides that! There are unlimited numbers of work permits available in the industry where workers are needed and all these people have to do is to fill out the form and send it in to become legal. There is even an employer program so the employer can do it for them.

    There is no excuse to be an illegal! 60% of illegal aliens have not made any effort at all to get legal. So why are you taking their side?

    I've had conversations with illegals and they truly believe that they shouldn't have to obey our laws and should be allowed to keep their allegiance to their home country.

    Do you really believe that is the right kind of person we want to have in this country (not to mention all the diseases they bring that harm our people)?

  • Orenv||

    Yes they are children. Few doubt this and most see this as a tragedy. Who does the FEDS give these children to when they are processed? Foster parents? They need to be returned from where they came. Only then will the people there realize that this migration is fruitless, dangerous, and presumably expensive.

    If an American parent tried to do this, their children would be removed from the home. Do we know if this birth certificate is real? Do we know if it is certified? Do we know if it really belongs to this child? Do we really know the people on the US end who claim to be family actually are family? And if 5% are not, is it acceptable for our government to aid in human trafficking? Providing bus tickets to send them to people who would sexually abuse these kids in brothels?

    We really know nothing about these children, and until we do, we need to keep them in detention till we positively ID them, put them in foster care (for the very young), or deport them. If their families ever want to see these children again, deportation is the best bet.

  • Ralph Wylie||

    This "Humanitarian Crisis" is a pure fabrication promoted by politicians that value vote-getting/pandering, appeasement and politics above what's best for the country. America's number one Illegal Alien, Baracko Bama is guilty of this and more.

  • Lawman45||

    Send them back to where the birth certificate says they come from. Otherwise, inevitably, American laws become a joke. And America as a separate culture disappears. Economic betterment has never been recognized as a reason for flaunting the law. This is just a form of "unarmed robbery" of a job from those LEGALLY entitled to be in the United States.

    This is also how the Londonistan phenomenon began. One "anchor baby" and the entire family tree is here next.

  • Baron Von Weinermobile||

    there is no american culture and there never has been. that is what makes it great. save your xenophobic romanticism for someone else.

  • xirus11||

    Hey, I have no problem with "illegal" immigration.
    I just hope Uruguay and every country between here and there feels the same way. :P
    #fts

  • xirus11||

    Going the wrong way, kiddos.
    #fts #murica #deportme #pls

  • LaKeisha||

    If you like your Honduran child, you will be able to keep your Honduran child...

  • Lawman45||

    [quote] coming "to escape violence, abuse, persecution, trafficking and ECONOMIC DEPRIVATION." [/quote]

    That includes EVERYONE in the entire world! Except maybe English Lords and Earls.

    I'm disappointed in you Steve. One sad photo and logic goes out the window.

  • BambiB||

    Shoot them at the border. Video the kills. Transmit the video to Mexico 24/7/365 with the message, "Those who invade the United States run the risk of being killed."

    After the first half-dozen or so, the flood will STOP.

    If it doesn't, shoot more.

    Any caught in the country should be promptly finger-printed, retina-scanned, photographed and hauled to the border and dumped over the fence with the warning that if they return, they will be executed.

    Problem solved.

  • ||

    To you, BambiB, the Enlightenment was just something that happened to other people, wasn't it?

  • Baron Von Weinermobile||

    retina scan? holy crap dude, you watch too much CSI. who you gonna have do this? Batman? how about you shut up and let the adults talk mmmmkay?

  • Black&Yellow||

    A lot of Xenophopia on here, where are the real liberty lovers?

  • Zoobs||

    For all those concerned about the "human rights" aspect of the invasion, sign up on a registry to provide unlimited financial support to those who are given "asylum". Put your money where your idealism is and leave the rest of us taxpayers alone! BTW, how about all those children in Dalfur? Shouldn't we be taking them in too?

  • MCO||

    I love children, but the disease factor is a real issue, it is unfair to our citizensto disregard the likelihood of epidemics in America. Plus, how can we encourage separating children from their parents? I would imagine the parents have been lied to about what is happening up here and wouldn't want their children to be in limbo and "integrated" into a system that will try to make them into a "working class (slave) culture". Doesn't anyone realize that when we allow and encourage "illegal immigration" without guidelines (learning the language, following laws and rules, etc.) that we make these fellow humans into a type of slave class? Sure, a few may rise to the top, but the majority will be doing the "grunt" work at rock bottom prices and can be controlled by people to vote and act a certain way and since they haven't known freedom, they won't know how to recognize the signs of losing it. By all means we should fix our immigration laws and make a place for people to come better their lives. That does away with the However, when we "look the other way" it doesn't hurt us nearly as much as it hurts them. But, I guess if you are looking to make sure we have a supply of cheap labor by calling it compassion that is your prerogative. My take is they should be with their parents and the churches and Christians should take up donations and use missionaries to return them home. That way the government doesn't have to do it and it will be done by good people. That is compassion.

  • toadboy65||

    Why does nobody comment on the parents who send the kids north?

  • bellahealth||

    I cannot help but comment about the emotional health of these children. As a mother of 7, an RN, an someone who has both worked in Haiti, Russia, and Guatemala with orphans (and have 3 adopted children; two as teenagers)-I can tell you that the best place for these children is with there parents if at all possible. We are doing them no favors by giving them a amnesty. Even if they have relatives in the US most of the children have not seen these relatives in many years and their "real" bonded parents are back home in Central America. Several articles I have read have the medical personal relating how many of the children do not understand why they were sent here, wanting to go home (back where they came), and just in general not being happy with their situation. I can promise you that is my personal experience in Haiti, Russia and Guatemala. Even with extreme poverty, parental abuse and other horrors the children still would rather be with their parents (or long term caregiver) and in most cases will grow up healthier emotionally if they are. Would you want to be sent half way around the world to a country by yourself where you don't speak the language? It is the amnesty crowd that is pretending they want the children to stay for humanitarian reasons. It is just for their own political reasons.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Video Game Nation: How gaming is making America freer – and more fun.
  • Matt Welch: How the left turned against free speech.
  • Nothing Left to Cut? Congress can’t live within their means.
  • And much more.

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement