MENU

Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

Adopted 4-Year-Old Daughter of Americans Probably Won't Be Deported. Either Way, Our Immigration System Is Broken.

Angela Becerra's case is a reminder that legal immigration is more complicated than just "getting in line."

Screenshot/KDVRScreenshot/KDVRBoth of her parents are legal U.S. citizens. But if 4-year-old Angela Becerra doesn't leave the country within the next three weeks, she runs the risk of deportation.

When Angela was born in May 2014, Amy and Marco Becerra were living in Peru. Marco is a dual U.S.–Peruvian citizen, and the couple owned home in the country. Though they're not Angela's biological parents, they've been taking care of the little girl for her entire life.

Angela was less than two weeks old when she was left at an orphanage by her developmentally disabled mother. Amy and her husband took Angela in and eventually decided to adopt her. Since they were living in Peru, the adoption was finalized in a Peruvian court last April. "The unique thing about Angela's adoption is it's not an international adoption. It's a domestic adoption in Peru," Amy tells KDVR.

Around that time, the family decided to move to Colorado. They had to send in an immigration application for Angela, but her case kept getting delayed.

Eventually, Angela came to the U.S. on tourist visa. But that visa expires at the end of the month, and her immigration application has been denied. "If she expires her visa, she is officially here as an undocumented alien, and legally is at risk for deportation even though both her parents are citizens," Amy tells KDVR.

The Becerras say they don't know why Angela's immigration application was denied. David Bier, an immigration policy analyst at the Cato Institute, suspects it has to do with their application for a tourist visa. "You are just not supposed to use a tourist visa to come to the United States to then apply for permanent residency," Bier tells Reason. Bier says it sounds like the Becerras first applied for a permanent visa, then opted for a tourist one instead. "As a consequence of that, the administration treats you as having given up your other visa," he adds.

Matt Kolken, an immigration attorney and national immigration reform advocate, thinks there's a viable solution. "The law specifically provides that if you are an immediate relative of a United States citizen, [you're] eligible to apply for adjustment of status, which is to become a green-card holder from inside of the country," says Kolken.

Since Angela is a child of two U.S. citizens and has already been "inspected" and "admitted" into the country, this shouldn't be a problem. "Just because she becomes an undocumented immigrant for a temporary period, if you're a minor and you're the child of U.S. citizens you should be able to get a green card and get this fixed," Bier says.

Still, "this is how people get entrapped in a broken system where things don't make sense." Angela's story will probably have a happy ending. But people who say legal immigrants can just "get in line" should keep stories like hers in mind.

ReasonReason

Photo Credit: Screenshot/KDVR

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.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Adopted 4-Year-Old Daughter of Americans Probably Won't Be Deported. Either Way, Our Immigration System Is Broken.

    Story about something that wont happen.

    System is broken alright. American citizens should not have to worry about shit like this because they are Americans and the immigration system is designed for Americans and our security.

    The immigration system has been gamed so much and for so long that Americans are sick of it and Trump is doing something about it.

    If illegals would stop flooding the US immigration system with bogus asylum petitions, an American family could easily get some bureaucrat to make sure this adopted kid stays in the USA.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    So even when you agree that the immigration bureaucrats are acting wrongly, you still blame the undocumented immigrants?

    Wow

  • Hugh Akston||

    You would be surprised how much sense the world makes when you realize that every problem can ultimately be traced to people born outside the US.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Yea, Hug. We need border patrol for all the Americans trying to exit the USA.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    I cannot tell by this article. Its a TDS, so much of important details are omitted.

    Yes, I blame the illegals for much of the immigration resources soaked up. Without illegals, we would not need a wall, thousands of border patrol, and detention centers.

    The fact that YOU dont blame the illegals at all is not really shocking. You are Chemjef who used to be Chemjeff among other socks.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    Was it undocumented immigrants which trapped Angela in this bureaucratic nightmare?

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Democrats and Republicans created the bureaucratic situation. They refused to do anything with immigration rules that make it easy for Americans to get new spouses and adopted kids naturalized.

    They didnt have the balls to tell immigrants "no" and allowed in hordes of illegals at various times in the last 40 years.

    Some of its illegals fault and some of its worthless politician's faults.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    The state told lots and lots and lots of potential immigrants "no". That is why there are illegal immigrants in the first place and that is why there are waiting times for certain classes of immigration that stretch into decades.

    Blaming illegal immigrants for a situation that they had absolutely no role in is just cruel.

    Plus, it just furthers the impression that the restrictionist right views illegal immigrants as little more than convenient scapegoats against whom they can take out all their frustrations. Budget out of balance? It's the illegals' fault! Tax rates too high? It's the illegals' fault! Crime too high in certain areas? It's the illegals' fault! Fewer people voting for Republicans? It's the illegals' fault! Global warming? It's the illegals' fault! (You get the idea.)

    Instead of just blaming illiterate Guatemalans for all of your problems, perhaps you should take a closer look at these problems and try to examine precisely what role, IF ANY, illegal immigration has on these problems.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    And do you know who else used powerless individuals as whipping posts for riling up citizen anger?

    This is Demagoguery 101. It is just WRONG on so many levels. Don't fall for his crude schtick. And no it's not just Trump. It's also a whole lot of people on the right who know that running sensational stories about illegal immigrants behaving badly is a great way to generate views and clicks and advertising bucks. Be better than these demagogues and charlatans and grifters. And I actually don't even primarily blame Trump for this. I think Trump is a lot like your elderly uncle who watches Fox News all day and uncritically believes most of it. I DO blame the producers and content writers for places like Fox News and Breitbart, who deliberately and intentionally push an anti-immigrant narrative for their own corrupt gain. They know what they are doing and yet they do it anyway. They will run all day with a lurid story about an illegal immigrant raping a child, and never one bother to point out statistics on what illegal immigrants are really like (hint: they're not all child rapists).

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    And just to be clear, I don't think Trump is a Nazi, or a fascist, or Hitler, or any of the rest. But I DO think there is some disturbing similarity in the techniques, between what Trump's team is doing in scapegoating illegal immigrants, and between what the Nazis did in scapegoating Jews. This is Reason #1 why, no matter what policies Trump may put forth or how many quality SCOTUS judges he might nominate, I can never support the man, because that would mean personally endorsing these vile and horrific techniques. And I cannot vote for a man to be the most powerful person on the planet, when he wins by beating up some of the most powerless people on the planet. It is downright offensive to me.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Trump is supported and voted in by Americans to say no more illegals.

    Thats not good enough for open borders people, so Trump also added a ban for immigrants from countries that are not friendly with the USA.

    Thats not good enough....

    See the trend here? The Silent Majority, who swept Trump into office, are being told by the minority that Americans cannot decide American law that is constitutional.

  • Mcgoo95||

    Well said cri. ditto

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    LC is correct. People want I. Iteration straightened out, and they want the wall.

    Wha they don't want is more lawlessness, or an amnesty.

  • SQRLSY One||

    Good job chemjeff !!!

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    No, it wasn't. Don't encourage his soft headed idiocy.

  • Deconstructed Potato||

    And do you know who else used powerless individuals as whipping posts for riling up citizen anger?

    Who is Citizen Anger? I don't think I'd like to see him riled up.

  • RAYMONDO||

    "Blaming illegal immigrants for a situation that they had absolutely no role in is just cruel."

    Illegal immigrants had no role in illegal immigration? wut?

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    Jeff, they're illegals. Not people here lawfully who forgot to grab some papers sitting by the door.

    So just stop, m'kay? It's bullshit, all your other lame arguments are bullshit. You're bullshit.

  • Paloma||

    You're a fucking virus.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Trolls like you hate Libertarians like me.

  • Flinch||

    Details are missing indeed. But I've been there/done that and it took a year - with everything going "smoothly" [just one delay/no denials and several round trips back & forth to get procedures set so my family moved together] and I have never held dual citizenship. In my case, I burned about $75k to make everything happen start to finish. Lots of airline miles and keeping two households afloat is not easy on the wallet. You aren't going to get through what used to be an in house back & forth between a consular office and people at State: DHS got injected into the mix post 9/11, which means applications don't hit a consular office until about the 4-6 month mark for them to begin processing. Gone are the days of 90 day processing. In that light, you might blame Bush: DHS probably did not need to be created - congress needed to stop playing kick the can.
    More importantly, there is no such thing as an "undocumented immigrant" - they are either legal or not. Doing violence to language by suggesting that an illegal alien once had legal entry but lost proof of that is subversive to both english and the law.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    The word 'immigrant' itself has no necessary connection to the legality of migration.

    I do not prefer to use the term 'illegal immigrant' because I believe it dehumanizes them.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    chemjeff also prefers not to use the term "thief" for the same reason.

  • Bubba Jones||

    Bureaucrats are always buffoons.

    Heightened enforcement is always a response to violations.

  • Benitacanova||

    Boo hoo. This is news?

  • Ron||

    But people who say legal immigrants can just "get in line" should keep stories like hers in mind."

    But they did find a way to make it legal so yes the system is f up but this is a total non-story of something that can happen at any government buracracy and has little to do with the immigration itself. non-story and yes she was in line and they are dealing with it.

  • Ron||

    and to continue the last person to ripe a child from legal U.S. guardians was Janet Reno but thats whataboutism apparently

  • Fancylad||

    The infographic that accompanies this story is the stupidest thing I've seen in a while.
    Apparently even a five year wait time from immigration to full citizenship is Too Long. It should be an instantaneous process, fill out the form and voilà.
    I'd hate to see what they think of Canada, Australia, Brazil, the E.U or Mexico's immigration processes. Better yet, China, Russia or Japan's.

  • ||

    Either Way, Our Immigration System Is Broken.

    Broken and still one of the most sought out and egalitarian in the world. The US takes in more immigrants and refugees than any other country in the world. Americans worry that too many immigrants will take their jobs because unemployed immigrants are the exception. Unlike the EU and parts of C. and S. America where they are the norm. American immigrants' rights to assembly, religion, and speech are more protected than any nation in the world. To the point that in one of the most natively hoplophobic cities in the US, an 'foreign national' can acquire and discharge a gun passively to defend himself, claim it as a political statement about self-defense, and be granted full due process in consideration as to whether he has a legal right to defend himself in such a manner. A city where natives and fellow nationals found with ammunition and gun together in a vehicle are regularly convicted whether they discharged the weapon or not. Our immigration system is broken like no other.

  • MWG||

    Nothing you said has anything to do with the fact that the bureaucratic process of immigrating to the US is a complete shit show.

    It's like saying, "Yeah, our interstate highway system moves more people and goods across the country than almost any other country in the world. Our roads are 99% asphalted. Our DMV is broken like no other."

    The fact that immigrants WITHIN the US have their rights protected says nothing about the actual process of immigrating to the US.

  • ||

    The fact that immigrants WITHIN the US have their rights protected says nothing about the actual process of immigrating to the US.

    Here let's turn that around: The fact that immigrants WITHIN China, S./C. America, the EU, and Africa don't have their rights protected says nothing about the actual process of migrating to China, S./C. America, the EU, and Africa. Again, the US immigration system is so fucked up that it's undertaken, multiple times, by more people from all over the world than any other even when others are more politically, regionally, and financially expedient.

    You buy into this idiotic notion where borders are a fiction when you want them to be and then a reality when you want them to be that. Immigration is just about getting people across a line. Who cares whether, once they've crossed the line, they don't assimilate, can't get jobs, and violently displace the natives. The point is they crossed the line that's imaginary and nobody's supposed to care about and, somehow, that ensures freedom.

    "Our roads are single-lane dirt trails, the natives won't lend you money or employ you to buy a car, and our driver's license qualifies you for a small, government-subsidized loan to buy a car and enough gas to get you to the border 'voluntarily'... but our DMV is second to none!"

  • Fancylad||

    Complete shit compared to who? Canada, Australia, Brazil, the E.U or Mexico?
    The American system looks like the acme of benevolence and efficiency in comparison.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    The immigration system can both be broken and have a large pipeline of applicants at the same time. They are not mutually exclusive.

    By your reasoning, the IRS is a wonderfully terrific agency because - well just look at all the taxes that they collect.

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    I can see where an 'induhvidual', such as yourself, could come to such a poor conclusion.

  • ||

    By your reasoning, the IRS is a wonderfully terrific agency because - well just look at all the taxes that they collect.

    Because immigration to the US is mandatory the same way paying taxes is? Any given country has half a dozen different embassies of western nations where people can apply for asylum. Save two countries, immigration to the US requires you to pass through at least one other country (who's immigration policies, presumably, are not a shit show or less of one). Can I choose to pay my taxes to whatever nation I choose at whatever embassy I choose or are you going to tell me that's not how borders work?

  • Brandybuck||

    This four year old girl is one of those MURDERERS and RAPISTS that our holy father Trump has been warning us about. Deport her criminal ass! Make America Safe Again!!!11!

  • Echospinner||

    The article is misleading. It should say "4-year-old future MS-13 member Angela Becerra"

  • Echospinner||

    Check out dad in the picture. What is up with the bandana? And the picture is framed to cover up the tats. Let's see those arms amigo. He has to be a gangster, coke dealer or both. Hey if he loves the kid let them go back to shithole Peru where they belong.

    It must feel good to be a Trumpist. The world just falls into place.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    The man clearly has his sights set on "violently displacing the natives". You can see it in his eyes. And his fake-ass smile. You just know behind that smile, he is seething with contempt towards America.

  • JoeBlow123||

    Chemjeff stop being so sensitive.

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    His pussy is bleeding again.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    Oh fuck off. You are nothing but a worthless troll who comes here and shits on every thread. You're no better than Michael Hihn in that regard. At least Hihn can be amusing at times. You are just an angry bitter troll.

  • Fancylad||

    You're no better than Michael Hihn
    Are you trying to tell us you're not one of his sock accounts? Are you maybe Tony?

  • An Owl Named Dur||

    Im calling bullshit on this article.

    I'm an immigration attorney. Here's what actually happened. Angela's parents tried to game the system. Since they intended her to be a permanent resident, they should have obtained an immigrant visa to bring her to the US. But this is more expensive and takes more time, documentation, and money. So they decided to avoid that and apply for a tourist visa, knowing that she was in no way coming to the US as an actual tourist. This is a no-no.

    Moreover, there is no way that they could have completed the tourist visa application, given their actual intentions, without lying on the application.

    Are they being prosecuted for lying on an official application? No. Will little Angela actually be deported? No. Is there an avenue available to fix this, despite the parents' intentional deception? Yes. Is Reason, yet again, a completely unreliable source on anything immigration related. Oh yes.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    Let's suppose you're right, and that this couple did commit visa fraud. WHY is it so difficult for couples like this to get an immigrant visa for their adopted child? This is the type of thing that should be a no-brainer.

    If you do favor having rules against migrants coming across the border, and punishing undocumented immigration, and as long as you favor any amount of legal immigration at all, then you also must, IMO, favor making the process for legal immigration to be as simple and streamlined as possible. Because otherwise, having a clunky expensive bureaucratic mess of a process just incentivizes illegal immigration and visa fraud, like perhaps in this case.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Follow the constitutional rules, change the rules, or violate the rules.

    Just dont expect much sympathy when you violate rules after tryong to game the system that other people try and follow.

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    Yes, Jeff, a lot of government processes are overly complicated, slow, and expensive. Look at the VA (something Reason largely,ignores in favor of crying about is not doing enough for foreigners), which has all kinds of problems. Which are actually causing our veterans to die.

    Instead of fighting our president, Jeff, maybe you should be supportive when he's trying to fix this stuff.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    Okay, what *specifically* should I be supportive of with his supposed efforts to "fix this stuff'?

  • JoeBlow123||

    "Because otherwise, having a clunky expensive bureaucratic mess of a process just incentivizes illegal immigration and visa fraud, like perhaps in this case."

    This just in, personal responsibility and accountability no longer considered libertarian principles. Environmental determinism and circumstance controls the fates of individuals like a sadistic puppeteer....

    ... said no libertarian ever. This is some leftist hogwash I would expect from Bernie or Corbyn, not the avowed arch-libertarian chemjeff.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    It was surpising that Reason wrote more than TRUMP ...IMMIGRATION ...OUTRAGE.

  • Trollificus||

    It's filler. And people look at the article and their brains go "TRUMP...IMMIGRATION...OUTRAGE" and that's about it.

    I actually never thought I'd see REASON putting out "But what about the chiiiildrens?" articles, but here we are. Jebus.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    There is nothing wrong with showing the human cost of statism.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    There are benefits of small and limited 'statism': property rights enforced by the state, effective national defense, free market with contracts enforceable under rule of law....

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    And we all know that without that law and order that little Jeffie detests so much that he would be among the first casualties of the new societal order of 'gimme your stuff or die'.

  • FlameCCT||

    I would also note that once the adoption was complete, all they had to do was register it with the US consulate, just like a birth abroad is registered.

  • JoeBlow123||

    Adoptions take a long time to finalize legally and adding immigration on top of this is only going to confuse the issue further. It is zero surprise something like this could take a year plus to finalize.

    Parents made their own choices so they have to own them. Maybe they should have thought about the stupidity of taking their adopted kid into the USA on a tourist visa while they were trying to file official paperwork for immigration.

  • An Owl Named Dur||

    Exactly. The parents embarked upon a scheme to avoid inconvenient legal requirements. That scheme failed (as it was almost certain to do because it was very ill conceived). So far, so good. I'm fairly sympathetic to efforts to avoid government bureaucracy, though half assed ones like this are best eschewed. But if caught, you want to moan about the injustice of getting caught ... cry me a river.

  • Mindscape||

    10 million illegals, but here's anecdotal evidence that something might maybe possibly could end up unjust. We get the agenda already, Reason- you don't like borders. How about for every article you publish like this, you also publish one about an illegal raping a child or killing someone? You know, for balance.

    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018.....entry.html

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    Nobody at Reason gives a fuck about that, except for maybe ENB on the rapes, and only if women are the ones being raped.

  • AZ Gunowner||

    The system isn't broken it is over-whelmed.

    Why?

    Because the BP isn't on the border, they are inland searching for drugs. Example, drive west on I-8 towards Yuma AZ, and you'll encounter a BP checkpoint. But I-8 is North of the border there, it is NOT the border. And they run a drug dog around your car. You don't need a drug dog to find illegal immigrants hiding in the wheel wells.

    Why?

    Well for one thing they are bureaucrats, and if they actually solved the problem they are being paid to solve they would put themselves, or at least a large part of themselves, out of business.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    Drug laws are the "gateway laws" for the state to begin to violate all the rest of your rights. Drug laws gives the state the pretext to start searching-but-not-really-searching your possessions in order to find that demon weed. If they do find the illegal herbs - or even if they don't, but their specially trained drug dogs do, who by the way can't really be cross-examined in court, shame that - then that is the state's opening to start asking all the invasive questions about your citizenship papers or the guns in your car or whatever else that they wish.

    I keep asking the border prohibitionists how they would design a system of strict border security while also robustly securing the Fourth Amendment rights of citizens. They can't come up with a satisfactory answer. Because they know, I suspect, that robust border security must necessarily require infringing on people's constitutional rights, and the Fourth Amendment is the first to go.

    So the border patrol agents you saw at the checkpoint aren't stupid, they know what they are doing. They are finding the necessary pretext to start asking those invasive questions and then hauling away the illegal humans.

    Which is also why, I suspect, that once more people on the right realize how drug laws really work, they will never want to let them go. Because they are just too valuable as a tool for them to enforce their border security fantasies.

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    Little Jeffie, you probably just can't understand their answers. As they might be a complicated for a simple tyke like you.

  • Longtobefree||

    There is another Jeffie that does not really understand drug laws - - - - - - -

  • AZ Gunowner||

    nooo, you miss the point entirely.

  • AZ Gunowner||

    more -

    If the BP would stop the illegal immigrants from getting across the border, most of them are simply walking across it, then we wouldn't have to deal with them in the legal system.

    I'll bet 80-90% of the problem would go away.

  • MG58||

    Worth noting that a substantial portion, perhaps half or more, of illegal immigrants did not enter the country illegally. See https://bit.ly/2M5VJvX for a good rundown of the available info on this.

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    That wall is sounding cheaper all the time, relative to. The alternative.

  • Sevo||

    JoeBlow123|8.10.18 @ 7:52PM|#
    "Adoptions take a long time to finalize legally and adding immigration on top of this is only going to confuse the issue further. It is zero surprise something like this could take a year plus to finalize.
    Parents made their own choices so they have to own them. Maybe they should have thought about the stupidity of taking their adopted kid into the USA on a tourist visa while they were trying to file official paperwork for immigration."

    Further, like the 'children not allowed to go to jail with Mommy, this is but one more TDS story.
    Somehow, with no change in the process (see the graphic above), the innuendo (nudge, nudge) tells us that poopy-head TRUMP CAUSED THE PROBLEM!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    Perhaps I'm wrong; please direct me to the stories regarding the same issues when the earlier lying piece of shit held office.
    I'll wait.

  • Mickey Rat||

    "David Bier, an immigration policy analyst at the Cato Institute, suspects it has to do with their application for a tourist visa. "You are just not supposed to use a tourist visa to come to the United States to then apply for permanent residency," Bier tells Reason. Bier says it sounds like the Becerras first applied for a permanent visa, then opted for a tourist one instead. "As a consequence of that, the administration treats you as having given up your other visa," he adds."

    Sometimes it is not easier to ask for forgiveness rather than permission.

  • EscherEnigma||

    Not really. They got the kid to the US and the kid probably won't be deported. So it might not have been faster in the long run, but the critical period (getting the kid to the US and not maintaining two addresses) was shortened.

  • Eddy||

    That poor little girl was never a tourist, what a crock.

    But we should have laws to respect foreign adoption orders - and then the parents should have the same rights vis-a-vis adopted children. So if the parents can live in the U. S. they should be able to bring their adopted children with them.

    If this process is too expensive, take a look at it to see how to make it less so.

  • Eddy||

    It occurs to me that child-trafficking rings might forge adoption orders or even procure actual adoption orders through fraud.

    To deal with the former case, U. S. consular staff should be able to tell the difference between a real adoption order and a fake one.

    If the latter is a problem (and I don't know if it is), then prosecution of the traffickers, including the fake "parents," would be the answer - but again, I don't actually know if there are countries where the courts are corrupt enough to grant bogus orders of adoption, I just mention it in case I overlooked anything.

  • Eddy||

    Hmmm....lots of articles on Google about bogus adoptions with the help of traffickers. I haven't mastered the subject in the time it took to skim the articles, but it's obviously one thing to worry about (how much to worry, I don't know).

  • Ecoli||

    is the only "fix" to have open borders?

    What is "Comprehensive Immigration Reform"? I have heard the phrase for at least a decade, with no explanation of what is proposed.

    Trump is proposing "comprehensive immigration reform" but progs don't want it even though most Americans seem to like his proposals. The US cannot be the world's piggy bank.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    is the only "fix" to have open borders?

    Okay, so tell us your "fix" instead. And not just slogans like "enforce the border". Something more concrete than that.

  • Ecoli||

    Enforce immigration laws, as ancestrialLocke implies below. Trump is actually trying to do that.

    We obviously will not be able to turn back every immigrant, but clamp down.

    Invite immigrants that are a net financial positive.

    Re-institute the Bracero program to bring in laborers when needed. Treat them decently and pay them a fair wage.

    Were I king, I would eliminate the birthright citizenship clause in the 14th amendment.

    What are your ideas on the subject?

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    Ecoli, that is all pops and buzzes to Little Jeffie. And he will be largely uninterested anyway, b cause it does nothing to tug on his sensitive heartstrings.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    Enforce immigration laws

    See, this is just a slogan. Immigration laws ARE enforced. They have been enforced all along. You want to enforce them harder? How?

  • Ecoli||

    So, you have no ideas or thoughts except open borders, Chem? Just open the gates and open our wallets?

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    I am asking the closed-border crowd to put forth something more substantial, beyond just slogans. I'm not going to let you invert the argument this time. At least Mark22 has put something forward below with some substance to it, other than simply "enforce the law harder".

  • Nuwanda||

    "I am asking the closed-border crowd to put forth something more substantial..."

    See, Jeff, there's your problem in a nutshell. To you, anyone who isn't for open borders is for closed borders. That's like saying if you're against having sex with kids, you're against sex for adults. Or if you're against open carry for six-year-olds, you're against it for adults.

    The workable solution is a border with crossing points for those who want to apply to enter. The only alternative to a border without crossing points is no border at all. Whichever way you slice it, you either enforce a border with crossing points or you don't have one at all. There is no halfway solution because that's what we have now, or haven't you noticed?

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    So please, tell us some of your specific ideas on how to enforce the law harder.

    Because I'll be quite honest, when I hear the closed-border crowd say "all we need to do is enforce the law!", I think of the drug war prohibitionists who keep insisting that all we need to do to get the demon weed off our streets is to "enforce the drug laws on the books". That doesn't work for the drug war and I don't think just throwing more money and power at immigration authorities will make the undocumented migrant problem go away either.

    But, if I'm wrong, please show me where I'm wrong. What are your specific ideas on how to enforce the law harder?

  • Nuwanda||

    I just showed you where you're wrong, Jeff. The border legitimately exists and the state has a legitimate authority to secure it and to determine legal mechanisms for crossing it, either temporarily or permanently.

    If you want to conflate the drug war with a legal system of immigration, then that's just another example of your lack of ability to distinguish between two very different things. The state shouldn't have anything to say about drugs, and who uses them, or how they get them. But what's that got to do with the legal procedures for entering a country? You might as well suggest my right to consume avocados has something to do with immigration.

    Drugs are not within the legitimate purview of the state but who crosses the border is. Now, Jeff, what you need to say is that you agree. Or, be honest and say the state has no say in who crosses the border at all. But stop pretending you're seeking a workable system of legal immigration since in the very first instance that necessitates a border and legal procedures for crossing it. The rest is mere detail.

  • Mark22||

    Okay, so tell us your "fix" instead.

    Limit immigration to skill-based immigration. Require citizenship/immigration status to be incorporated into all IDs used when interacting with federal agencies or property (airports, interstate highways, interstate commerce, etc.). Denial of all services that receive any kind of federal funding to non-citizens. Enforcement of immigration law by all federal agencies. Strict IRS penalties for employers who employ illegal workers. Note that the states don't need to do anything.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    Require citizenship/immigration status to be incorporated into all IDs used when interacting with federal agencies or property (airports, interstate highways, interstate commerce, etc.)

    1. IDs like driver's licenses are issued by states, not the federal government. In order for your plan to work, you would either have to coerce the states to enforce federal law via their IDs (which they aren't allowed to do now), or create an entirely separate federal ID that everyone is required to have. Do you really want to do that? Having a mandatory national ID would really grease the skids for lots of half-baked statist ideas. Why, it could very easily also be used as a single-payer health insurance card! Or, it could also be very helpful in creating that national database of gun owners! Do you *really* want to go there?

    Here is an article on the last time the national ID card idea surfaced, from all the way back in 1997.
    http://www.cato.org/publicatio.....its-baaack

    2. It's a form of self-incrimination, prohibited by the Fifth Amendment. If I am an undocumented immigrant, and my mandatory ID card says "non-citizen" on it, then when I interact with the government in some way totally unrelated to immigration - like, driving on a road - if the agent of the state demands to see my mandatory national ID, he is simultaneously demanding that I incriminate myself in committing a crime.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    Strict IRS penalties for employers who employ illegal workers.

    There already are strict IRS penalties for employers who employ illegal workers! What do you want to do, make them stricterer? What would you consider "strict enough"?

    Furthermore, as you know, most tax law is enforced via self-reporting. That is because the IRS cannot look over the shoulder of every single employer to police what they are doing. If you want stricter enforcement however you're going to have to give the IRS more resources to police all these violations. (Which was, by the way, Obama's strategy as well for using the IRS to police compliance with ObamaCare.) I'm sure that will be a real popular idea!

    Finally, your plan is creating extra hassle and burdens ON CITIZENS, just as I keep saying all of these restrictionist plans must do. You are demanding that CITIZENS surrender more of their private information to the state in the form of this national ID card. And even if you think noncitizens shouldn't be protected by the Fifth Amendment, you are making it easier for the Fifth Amendment rights of citizens to be circumvented in the future. You want to give the IRS the power to impose harsher penalties. These are all restrictions and hassles ON CITIZENS. That is what all prohibitions must do.

  • Mark22||

    There already are strict IRS penalties for employers who employ illegal workers!

    $200-$2000 per illegal employee? I don't think that's particularly strict, in particular given the low risk of being caught.

    Furthermore, as you know, most tax law is enforced via self-reporting.

    Great! Have companies self-report the immigration status of every employee. Throw the people who made false statements in jail for tax fraud.

    Finally, your plan is creating extra hassle and burdens ON CITIZENS, just as I keep saying all of these restrictionist plans must do.

    And they ease burdens ON CITIZENS like me who have to pay for the costs illegals impose on the US. That is, you're saying it's perfectly fine to violate people's private property rights and send men with guns after them as long as it eases your burdens. Well, I disagree.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    Great! Have companies self-report the immigration status of every employee. Throw the people who made false statements in jail for tax fraud.

    Companies already are required to report the immigration status of every employee.

    What you want to do is to create an army of IRS agents to enforce immigration law. Which by the way was exactly the same strategy that Obama used to enforce ObamaCare's individual mandate.

    This army of IRS agents will not stop at looking at just immigration issues. They will fuck over every business looking for every little tax law violation that they can find.

    Furthermore it will be a much bigger hassle against the small businesses than it will be against the large ones. It will disincentivize starting businesses and entrepreneurship in general. Is that what you want?

    Oh wait I can hear it now: "If a business can't hire only legal workers, then they don't deserve to be in business in the first place." Which is exactly the same argument that the minimum wage crowd uses: "If a business can't pay its workers a 'living wage', then they don't deserve to be in business in the first place." This is how the statist authoritarianism of the right when it comes to immigration is really no different than the statist authoritarianism of the left. Both of them want to micromanage businesses, and society generally, to fit their vision of 'correct' behavior.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    And they ease burdens ON CITIZENS like me who have to pay for the costs illegals impose on the US.

    Not true. Someone is going to have to pay for that army of IRS agents that you want to hire. Instead of paying taxes to fund welfare for undocumented migrants, you will instead have to pay taxes to fund pensions for IRS agents. AND you will have to also stand in line at the new Federal DMV that you want to create to get your mandatory Federal ID card. You will not be better off financially. And you will be worse off from a liberty point of view. "Oh but all of those illegals will be kicked over the border!" Which is what this is really about - not about saving you money, it's making sure those 'unworthy' people don't contaminate the purity of essence of the USA.

  • Mark22||

    You are demanding that CITIZENS surrender more of their private information to the state in the form of this national ID card.

    What information do they surrender that the state doesn't already have? We're talking about adding citizenship information to existing ID cards. Having this information off-line on ID cards is far less intrusive than the current e-verify system, which collects this information centrally and isn't even particularly effective.

    You want to give the IRS the power to impose harsher penalties.

    You bet I do; the current situation, where people like me would have our lives destroyed for breaking rules, but employers get away with hiring illegals and enriching themselves at the expense of tax payers is unacceptable.

  • Mark22||

    IDs like driver's licenses are issued by states, not the federal government. In order for your plan to work, you would either have to coerce the states to enforce federal law via their IDs (which they aren't allowed to do now), or create an entirely separate federal ID that everyone is required to have.

    There is no coercion involved. The federal government simply says "these are not valid for federal agencies, but you can always bring something that satisfies our requirements". We're already imposing special federally recognized ID requirements when people get on planes.

    Having a mandatory national ID would really grease the skids for lots of half-baked statist ideas.

    Indicating citizenship on an ID card isn't the same as a national ID with a centralized database. Europe has national ID cards with citizenship information, but there is no centralized database.

    It's a form of self-incrimination, prohibited by the Fifth Amendment. ... then when I interact with the government in some way totally unrelated to immigration - like, driving on a road - if the agent of the state demands to see my mandatory national ID, he is simultaneously demanding that I incriminate myself in committing a crime.

    The Fifth Amendment says "nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself". Is using federal benefits a "criminal case"? No.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    We're already imposing special federally recognized ID requirements when people get on planes.

    What information do they surrender that the state doesn't already have?

    This is the problem - you are using current deprivations of privacy and liberty to justify FURTHER deprivations of privacy and literacy. Which is exactly what your proposal would end up doing - your national ID card would be used to justify even further deprivations of privacy and liberty, by, for instance, making it easier to implement single-payer health care (it would very easily serve as a national insurance card). So the Bernie Sanderses out there can just say, like you just said, "well, the government already collects all this information on you ANYWAY, so why not use it for MY 'great' idea?"

    Indicating citizenship on an ID card isn't the same as a national ID with a centralized database. Europe has national ID cards with citizenship information, but there is no centralized database.

    Read the link that I provided. The plans on the table were about creating a national ID card tied to the existing Social Security card. Which is a very logical way for them to approach it, and would be a central database.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    Indicating citizenship on an ID card isn't the same as a national ID with a centralized database.

    I repeat: STATES are in charge of providing IDs like driver's licenses. Not the federal government. If you want citizenship information on these existing state-issued IDs, either the federal government has to coerce states into doing so - which they aren't allowed to do currently - or the federal government has to create its own national ID. The federal government already has its own form of a national ID, called Social Security cards. Which is tied to a central database. So a very logical way for them to proceed is to simply require everyone to get a Social Security card with citizenship information on it. Which would then be a national ID with a centralized database. That is exactly what was proposed in the 1990's, and that is what would be proposed today.

  • EscherEnigma||

    We're already imposing special federally recognized ID requirements when people get on planes.


    Nah, RealID has been delayed and defanged for what, a decade now? It's a big ol' flop and really shows demonstrates that if the Fed wants a National ID card, it can't realistically backdoor it through driver's licenses.

  • Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland||

    Limit immigration to skill-based immigration.

    That appears to be the preference among the easily frightened, the bigoted, the economically inadequate, and the backward, but there are not enough lowlife goobers in America to support prospects for that approach in the medium to long term. Some yahoos misunderstand the situation -- and overstate the influence and number of the bigots -- because the yahoos are concentrated in our can't-keep-up backwaters.

  • Ecoli||

    Speaking of bigots, here you are.

  • Mark22||

    Limit immigration to skill-based immigration.

    That appears to be the preference among the economically inadequate

    It certainly is, because low-skill immigration places a terrible burden on poor Americans who are already struggling.

    but there are not enough lowlife goobers in America to support prospects for that approach in the medium to long term

    You may be right, there may not be enough people to oppose low-skill immigration to the US. In that case, the US is doomed. I'd prefer it didn't come to that, because I'd rather retire here than in the Bahamas or Monaco, but ultimately, it's people like you who have to deal with the consequences, not me.

  • AZ Gunowner||

    "Comprehensive immigration reform" is amnesty now and border security later.

    The later will never happen just like it never happened the last time we fixed the problem.

  • ancestrialLocke||

    The only thing broken about our immigration system is the fact a lot of politicians don't want to enforce it.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    Okay, how would you enforce it harder?

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    By actually following the laws as written. But I know that confuses you, Little Jeffie.

  • Echospinner||

    What if the laws as written and enforced are shit?

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    Get them changed? I read somewhere that this group called 'congress' might be able to do that.

  • Echospinner||

    I heard of them. Think they were a skater punk band in the 80s.

    Congress is useless. This has been a problem for decades and they have done nothing about it.

  • Ecoli||

    Something from The Atlantic actually worth reading!

    Google this: "Why the Left Is So Afraid of Jordan Peterson"

  • Mcgoo95||

    He is the antidote to all the identity politics bullshit the progresive movement has excreted.

  • Mark22||

    Still, "this is how people get entrapped in a broken system where things don't make sense."

    Things make perfect sense: they ignored the law, lied on their visa application (they applied for a tourist visa fully intending to immigrate), and then ran into problems. That's not a "broken system", they are experiencing the consequences of their blatant disregard for the law.

  • Echospinner||

    They filled out the papers. Should not take more than a week or two if they had the adoption papers which it looks like they did. The case kept getting delayed as happens too often. So they tried a workaround hoping to straighten it out after they got back here.

    That is what is meant by a broken system.

    My wife came here at age 5 with her family. Totally legal immigrants and she is a naturalized citizen. Her parents died at a young age and the paperwork was gone.

    When she went to apply for a passport she was denied. For 2 1/2 years we did everything INS asked. She showed up for multiple appointments, filled out everything. No results. Basically they ignored her. She was stateless.

    Finally we called the congressman office and pleaded with someone on staff. We gave him all the records. Fortunately the guy took the case. He physically went to wherever they keep that in DC and got a copy of her certificate that day.

    That is a f'd up system. It has been for years. The process should be simple and straightforward especially now with the technology we have.

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    Yes it should. Bet when the govt. pays $600 million for a $10 million website. You know that we will get soaked even if they get around to upgrading.

  • Echospinner||

    That is a given. It always costs more. Put FedEx in charge of immigration.

  • Mark22||

    They filled out the papers. Should not take more than a week or two if they had the adoption papers which it looks like they did.

    It "should not", but it does. For everybody. That's government for you. They way to change that is at the ballot box. But you avoid getting "entrapped" in the system by following its rules.

    When she went to apply for a passport she was denied.

    And if she had left the country during that time, she would have been in big trouble.

    That is a f'd up system

    Yes, it is. But it still operates by some basic rules with known consequences for breaking them. Coming in on a tourist visa and then wanting to stay is one of those things with predictable bad consequences.

  • gphx||

    The immigration system is broken if it lets in retards who breed and dump their offspring.

  • Deconstructed Potato||

    Except the offspring wasn't "dumped" in the USA. She was put up for adoption in Peru, and adopted under Peruvian proceedings.

    This seems to be about an adopted child's rights apparently being different to those of a child born to their natural parents. If an adopted child cannot be the same nationality as her parents, then what about kids born to US parents overseas? Nope, still American. It doesn't seem correct to me that anyone, any system, government, could tell US citizens that their 4yo daughter isn't American. Any immigrantion story brings up pointless petty, partisan finger pointing and accusations. I blame the bureacracy and that's it.

  • JoeBlow123||

    The immigration people are honestly probably worried about child trafficking and that's why this takes so long. They probably got burned once or twice with this and made the adoption with immigration process so burdensome it takes a long time and patience to navigate. Which is why these people are morons, they should have done their homework before trying to game the system.

    Their is a rule in Japan, for instance, that if a foreigner adopts a Japanese kid you have to stay in Japan for like 3 years after before you leave because they don't want child trafficking to happen. Imagine these dipshits just leaving or trying to leave after a week then being surprised the Japanese consular authorities are pissed with them. Who would have guessed!

  • Echospinner||

    Sure

    Best to leave it to the Japanese. Whatever they do. They keep immigration to near zero.

  • Longtobefree||

    Journalism hints:
    State the dates in the story; how long was "kept getting delayed"? Days, weeks, years? (plus we need to know if this was Trumps fault, or Obamas; or maybe Bush?)
    Tell us who initiated the delays; the feds asking for more data, the couple dodging for documents?
    Include the significant facts relating to the conflict of a tourist visa and a immigration request overlapping.
    Tell us why the denial letter did not state a reason for the denial; actually, tell us if that is true.
    And so forth.

  • FiftycalTX2||

    The system is not "broken". It is just not the OPEN DOOR some people want.

  • Pat001||

    The immigration system is not broken. People are breaking the law. And laws are not being enforced.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

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