MENU

Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

Immigration Orphans: How US Policy is Hurting American Kids

Brandi, an 8-year-old American child, vividly remembers the morning her father—an illegal Mexican immigrant—was forcibly taken from their Miami home by federal immigration officials. She had been getting ready for school when ICE officials entered the house with guns, demanding her father's arrest. She has not seen her father since.

Her story is heartbreaking but it is not unique: more than 100,000 American children are affected by parental deportations each year. These deportations can have devastating consequences for children; apart from the emotional and psychological effects of losing a parent, these children often end up in a financially perilous situation or are even placed in foster care. The byproduct of a broken immigration system, these childrens' stories have often gone unnoticed.

Except by Nora Sandigo.

A Nicaraguan immigrant and current Miami resident, Sandigo has devoted the past six years to helping children like Brandi. She is the legal guardian of over 800 American children who have lost at least one parent to deportation. 

"It’s a blessing and a huge honor knowing that I can serve with what I have. Its not as much as I would wish because I don’t  have the means and I’m just one person, but I’m really happy to be able to do something for these kids," says Sandigo.

Parents who fear deportation sign a contract with Nora, granting her "power of attorney" of their children in case they are deported. This enables Nora to oversee their daily needs, such as doctors appointments and school meetings. It also means that should deportation occur, she can take care of the child until they get placed in a home with family or friends. For illegal immigrant parents, this is a huge relief. Often times their worse fear is that their child will be put up for adoption and they will have to fight to regain custody rights.

And the children aren't the only ones who pay for the current immigration situation—taxpayers do too. It costs taxpayers approximately $26,000 a year for every child in foster care. In 2011, the US government spent at least $133 million to place these "immigration orphans" into foster care. In more recent years, this number is estimated to be closer to $600 million. 

For the most part, though, Nora provides for the childrens' everyday needs. 

"Every day we deliver emergency supplies to different homes in Miami and we visit the kids and bring them urgent things such as milk, Corn Flakes, things they need everyday, we also give them school supplies, clothes. In some cases we need to take them in an emergency because they need to go to the doctor, the parents or parent who is still there, who wasn’t deported, doesn’t have transportation. So we’re looking out after all of these details," says Sandigo. 

President Obama's executive stay on deportations is still in effect. However, even if it survives legal battles brought forth by Republicans, it will expire in 2016 when he leaves office. In order to provide lasting relief to these American children, Congress needs to enact a more comprehensive and humane immigration policy.

If you would like to contact or donate to Nora, click here. 

Approximately 8 minutes.


Produced by Amanda Winkler. Shot by Winkler and Joshua Swain. Narration by Alexis Garcia. 

Subscribe to Reason TV's YouTube channel for daily content.

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.

  • woodNfish||

    Children of illegals should be deported with them. There should not be automatic citizenship for the children of illegals that are born here. The illegal status of the parents should prevent the children from receiving automatic citizenship. Of course this won't happen because amerika celebrates and encourages stupidity. It is the national goal.

  • Zeb||

    Well, probably more because the 14th Amendment is not likely to be repealed.

  • ||

    What if they have one parent who is legal and the other is not?

    You're still breaking up that family.

    And don't say the parents can just get married, because under current US immigraiton, law it's not that simple. A husband/wife can't just sponsor their spouse if their spouse was in the country illegally. That only works for legal immigrants. They have to return to their home country for 2-10 years and maybe not ever get a legal visa to come back.

  • rocks||

    So just because a kid is involved, all of a sudden we should magically start to ignore laws? That is the reasoning that has gotten us to our current state along many factors, not just immigration.

    The US already has one the most open door immigration policies in the developed world. My son was born in Korea but there was ZERO chance of either him or my wife and I ever gaining citizenship there because of Korea's very closed policies for work VISA holders (the country still wants to maintain ethnic purity). You know what would have happened if we overstayed our visa, my wife and I would be in jail for decades and my son flown back to grandparents in the US.

    If you don't want your family to be broken up, then don't break immigration laws. And unlike the above Korea scenario, the US doesn't jail people but just deports them, they are free to take their child back. The only person "breaking up" the family are the parents who decide to leave their kids in the US.

  • Zunalter||

    +all the numbers.

  • agricola||

    hogwash. Korea is not jailing anyone for decades over a visa. And Korea is a small ethnic country not a huge contient. Can you tell the difference between 1 and 10,000? they aren't the same.

    There is no country in the world that says the child can stay but the parent can't. Insanity. You are just too scared to admit fear of a brown planet. If you don't like it then get off your ass and make a real nation in the image of your choice. The USA is not a projection for your fulfilment, and the best part is obviously you people are losing ground so this fantastic wish fulfillment isn't working and will not prosper.

  • Piaggio||

    "The US already has one the most open door immigration policies in the developed world"

    I am sorry, but this is not correct at all. Sure, they are way better than Korea's, but immigration laws in the US are still draconian. It sounds like you are just repeating Republican soundbites.

  • DarrenM||

    I don't know about illegal immigrants returning to their own country, but normally a spouse can come into the country in a few months. It used to be a year, but the law changes about 2001 or so. (I married my wife a year too soon to be able to take advantage of it.) Before this a fiance could come in within a few months, but spouses had to wait a year. It took them that long to fix this stupidity. However, immigrants don't vote, so it was a low priority.

  • XM||

    I can't help but feel that Reason is being intentionally obtuse on certain issues.

    Their response to the NYT expose on nail salons was to blame America's immigration policy. Well, it surely was, but it's not because the Vietnamese workers don't have citizenship, or because of deportations that almost always occur near the border.

    If you allow millions of undocumented aliens to engage in unregulated activity, it will lead to some instances of exploitation. The fact that two parties "consented" to this arrangement does not change this fact.

    Children of illegal aliens should be deported back with their parents. If the kid was an "anchor baby" and the kid's legal guardian wants him or her to stay, then it becomes complicated. Perhaps a stay of deportation or temp visa should be in order. They can arrange for supervised visitations.

    But it doesn't make sense to me that a divorced father in this country should have less rights regarding their children then illegal aliens.

  • OldMexican||

    Re: XM,

    If you allow millions of undocumented aliens to engage in unregulated activity, it will lead to some instances of exploitation.


    If you allow the government to regulate any activity, you will ensure the existence of clandestine activities where there will be some instances of exploitation. The fact that the exploited happen to be undocumented workers is irrelevant when it comes to the Laws of Economics.

  • jay_dubya||

    Good call OldMex. Its amazing to watch all of the love for free markets go down the drain when immigration comes up. Apparently human rights are a function of the location of your mothers vagina at birth and not part of being human.

  • Sam Haysom||

    I'll cop to being decidedly againat free markets as a means of people exchange. I mean John Calhoun and you would dig each other but to my mind free markets didn't work out so well tat time.

    The nice thing about markets is you can trade the production labor creates without having to trade people. It's a win-win.

  • agricola||

    sure it makes sense. Children stay with their parents or guardians, period. A divorcewd father might likely disqualify from the above. If you can't hold on to your family in the prosperity, freedom and abundance of America 2015 it's your own damn fault.

  • jay_dubya||

    "Children of illegals should be deported with them."

    Sounded better in the original German. Take a hike, fascist. The government has no role telling people where they can live or what jobs they can have. Its called freedom and its not just for white folks no mo'.

  • rocks||

    The only one bring up a race and attack a race is you you racist pig.

  • Live Free or Die||

    Due to the 14th Amendment, the kids should keep their citizenship. However, I don't feel bad for the parents. They knew the risk and should deal with the consequences. They can either keep their kids with them and return to their country or leave the kids here. They shouldn't get to stay just because they had a kid here. It'd be a horrible choice to make but they knew that risk coming in.

  • Sri||

    It's not so much as encouraging stupidity as it is the use of modern liberalism to achieve certain revenue and profit goals for American corporations on an accelerated scale.

  • Mickey Rat||

    There are no anchor babies, except there totally should be anchor babies!

  • Zeb||

    Of course there are anchor babies, in some senses. I am sure there are people who make efforts to be in the US when they give birth. Of course, as this story illustrates, it doesn't always work very well as an anchor.

  • ||

    There are undoubtably anchor babies.

    A Korean grad student in my lab got married in the Sun Yung Moon church, in a mass wedding, had a baby within a year, and then got divorced. I think his wife and the kid went back to Korea, but he's still legally the kids father so that kid can sponsor him to immigrate in 18 years. If he can't get a work sponsorship before then.
    It's probably more of a backup plan for him , or maybe moreso for the woman.

  • ||

    Actually, now that I think of it, I bet the woman's family paid him.
    He was sort of having a hard time affording the tuition.

  • jay_dubya||

    Wow a visa and all he has to do is support a child for the rest of his life? What an outrageous loophole!

  • tz||

    The Children can accompany their parents back to the Parents' native lands. If they are American Citizens, they can return when appropriate.

    The immigration system is only broken in that we let in too many illegals in the first place, then don't enforce the laws when they are here.

    You could make the same point for criminal fugitives who are citizens, with the same complaint.

    http://www.komonews.com/news/l.....34272.html http://www.nydailynews.com/new.....-1.2210842

    Illegal immigrants are basically fugitives - people who have broken the law, and there may be third party consequences, but it is the fault of the lawbreaker.

    If you think lawbreaking illegal immigrants shouldn't have to answer, then apply the same standard to every other criminal with children - no matter the crime, they should not be arrested and tried and sent to prison "because the children might suffer".

  • Zeb||

    The immigration system is only broken in that we let in too many illegals in the first place

    Um, if they are illegal, they aren't exactly being let in, are they?

    No one should obey bad laws if it isn't convenient for them to do so. Maybe immigration laws are just fine as they are, but I don't think so. The fact that they are law breakers is irrelevant to me, and should be irrelevant to anyone who isn't a complete authoritarian. All of us break laws every day. The question is are they doing any harm? Now, I am sure that some illegal immigrants are doing some harm. But it wasn't the crime of illegally entering the country isn't, by itself, harming anyone.

  • Zunalter||

    So, rule of harm instead of rule of law?

  • jay_dubya||

    Unjust laws arent laws at all.

  • OldMexican||

    Re: tz,

    The Children can accompany their parents back to the Parents' native lands. If they are American Citizens, they can return when appropriate.


    The government has NO authority under the Constitution to deport an American citizen or to compel an American citizen to leave the country without due process. The parents of children who are American citizens should at least have the opportunity to have an immigration judge hear their case.

    You could make the same point for criminal fugitives who are citizens


    Undocumented immigrants commit no acts of aggression by virtue of being in the U.S. You are equivocating.

  • Sam Haysom||

    Then the state can make arrangements for foster care. Have it your way I'd rather a kid grow up with parents but I'm a Neanderthal socon.

  • jay_dubya||

    How about we just stop deporting millions of people and we no longer need to pay for foster care for the children stolen by police? Or is that a little too real on the small government side of things for you?

  • Sam Haysom||

    How about we build a big wall like the Israelis have done to successfully eliminate illegal infiltration as they call it.

    No I'm not going to let your tyrannical narcissism overrule the expresses wishes of the American people. But maybe if you hold your breathe a real long time. Don't forget to flail those little legs.

  • Tak Kak||

    Does *any* law that, once violated, removes a parent from their home hurt the children? Yeah, I guess so. Really doesn't reflect on the merit of the law though.

  • Zeb||

    Laws against severe child abuse probably don't, on balance.

    You are right, it doesn't reflect on the merit of the law. I think there is one question you need to ask about the merit of any law. Does the activity that the law forbids harm or violate the rights of any individuals? That right there is enough to determine that current immigration rules are bullshit.

  • Tak Kak||

    "Does the activity that the law forbids harm or violate the rights of any individuals? That right there is enough to determine that current immigration rules are bullshit."

    Sure. If you're, say, a Catholic. Rights are a tricky sort of thing.

  • Zeb||

    I have no idea what you are trying to say. Do Catholics have something against immigration? I'm pretty sure Catholics have the same rights as everyone else.

    I think I can confidently say that simply crossing a border or being in a particular country without official permission does not harm anyone, nor does it deprive anyone of their property or other rights. Welfare, etc. does. But immigrants aren't perpetrating that particular act of aggression. Our fellow Americans are doing that.

  • Tak Kak||

    "I have no idea what you are trying to say. Do Catholics have something against immigration?"

    I'm saying the opposite. Catholics think people naturally have rights, including the right to migrate.

    "I think I can confidently say that simply crossing a border or being in a particular country without official permission does not harm anyone, nor does it deprive anyone of their property or other rights."

    That's a bit trickier. People have different views on the border and nation. For example, would you say people crossing your property line without your permission does no harm? Libertarians usually argue. Other groups say "no, they just walked on the grass, you're fine" or even, "it's their right to gambol freely"

    "Welfare, etc. does. But immigrants aren't perpetrating that particular act of aggression. Our fellow Americans are doing that."

    Both are. Many, many, many illegal immigrants receive various forms of welfare.

  • ||

    I don't think there is anything uniquely "Catholic" about the concept of natural rights.

  • ||

    Many, many, many illegal immigrants receive various forms of welfare.

    Uh, it's illegal in most places for them to do so, so this is kind of a myth.
    Not saying it doesn't happen, but if you know of any illegal immigrants getting welfare benefits, feel free to call the cops.

  • Tak Kak||

    "I don't think there is anything uniquely "Catholic" about the concept of natural rights."

    Didn't say there was. Catholics are but one example of a people who have a concept of natural rights. Others differ as to what the rights are. Further still some don't believe in natural rights at all.

    "Uh, it's illegal in most places for them to do so, so this is kind of a myth.
    Not saying it doesn't happen, but if you know of any illegal immigrants getting welfare benefits, feel free to call the cops."

    I think you are viewing welfare to narrowly, maybe as a basic cash transfer. Think about it more broadly. Public schools are open to them all as are hospitals. With that being said, many families use programs like SSI and TANF via their American-born children. (It's something like 50% of immigrant households use at least one form of direct welfare, I'll dig the stats up if you're that interested.)

  • XM||

    "Uh, it's illegal in most places for them to do so, so this is kind of a myth."

    That's why they fool the system and still get benefits. And at the state level, it's somewhat easier to get benefits of some kind.

    And I'm sort of speaking from experience here.

  • Sam Haysom||

    Its federal law that hospitals have to treat anyone who shows up. Calling the cops when Esperanza shows up with pneumonia isn't going to be very effective. And never mind that most welfare flows through from children so im not really clear what welfare illegals are prevented from accessing since all children are eligible for welfare by default. Healthcare and schooling are by far the biggest costs associated with illegal immigration and both are a veritible buffer for any interested.

  • ||

    Every food store in Texas has a sign in Spanish saying "WIC se' acceptan aqui"

    I sincerely doubt it's for the education of non English speaking citizens.

    Illegals definately get welfare of many knids.

    Ever been to an ER lately ?

  • Zeb||

    Thanks for clarifying on the Catholic thing.

    The nation isn't the collective property of all citizens. You have the right to keep illegal immigrants (or anyone else) off of your property. But you also have the right to allow anyone (including illegal immigrants) onto your property. So while the laws may help people who are afraid that they might accidentally allow an illegal immigrant onto their property, it also curtails the rights of people who do want to employ, house or otherwise interact with people who can't get visas.

    On the welfare issue, of course many immigrants get some sort of tax funded benefit (whether much of it is actual welfare is debatable). My point is that they aren't the ones stealing your money. They just benefit from the proceeds of the theft. It is other Americans doing the stealing and redistributing.

  • Tak Kak||

    "The nation isn't the collective property of all citizens."

    Yeah, many simply disagree with that.

    "You have the right to keep illegal immigrants (or anyone else) off of your property. But you also have the right to allow anyone (including illegal immigrants) onto your property."

    Yes, even reducing this to just libertarian views on property raises the same basic problems. So what if I allow them on my property? Short of jet packs, them getting there (via other people's property) could make my rights irrelevant.

    "On the welfare issue, of course many immigrants get some sort of tax funded benefit (whether much of it is actual welfare is debatable). My point is that they aren't the ones stealing your money. They just benefit from the proceeds of the theft. It is other Americans doing the stealing and redistributing."

    And again, it's irrelevant. The purchaser (or receiver) of stolen goods is still a criminal (under certain circumstances). The consequentialist question raised is whether it'd be cheaper to completely change American views of wealth redistribution or just block the border (or change immigration/citizenship laws, etc...) I think the latter.

    Now, whether consequentialist questions are your cup of tea is a different matter entirely.

  • jay_dubya||

    Borders are imaginary lines created for the benefit of Top Men. Any law that leads to policr stealing children because their parents crossed an imaginary line is bullshit. Take your pseudo-intellectual bullshit elsewhere, statist.

  • dan'o||

    they took ur' JERBS!!!

  • DenverJay||

    People who are escaping a life of poverty and corruption have my sympathy, and in a perfect world, everyone should be able to live where they want. But the massive influx of cheap labor is disrupting the market and distorting prices, negatively affecting lots of productive people. Further, we are importing millions of mostly poor people, who consume more resources than they produce. Schools spend so much time teaching English that native born students suffer. Property values fall. The problems are real.
    People have a right to restrict immigration to levels that the infrastructure that they paid for is not overburdened.
    In a perfect libertarian paradise, we could have open borders. We don't live in that world.
    Maybe we should have invaded Mexico and replaced it's government instead of Iraq.

  • MJGreen||

    Who cares, these kids will probably vote Democrat.

  • HeteroPatriarch||

    Whether they're here or not.

  • rocks||

    And that is why we have this. You will always end up the majority of new immigrants favoring one party or the other (depending on the politics of the day), and as a result there will always be gridlock from that party to keep immigration turned to max.

  • Cloudbuster||

    Step 1: Don't screw illegal alien men.

  • Cloudbuster||

    I'd wager The War on Drugs separates more children from their parents every year.

  • Invisible Finger||

    Illegal immigration is mostly a symptom, not a problem in and of itself.

    The problem is the minimum wage. It displaces Americans who can't fill jobs that aren't worth the high wage, and it creates an incentive for undocumented foreigners to fill those jobs. It also creates automation incentives,

  • Zeb||

    That and the attitude among many Americans that you are entitled to work that will give you an easy life working 40 hours or less a week. Immigrants largely come here to work, and it shows.

    When the economy was at its worst, I believe the rate of illegal immigration slowed down a lot.

  • Homple||

    The greedy bastards should have to work as many hours a week as they can stand up and be paid in scrip valid only at the company store and if they don't like it, they can start the next Microsoft or something.

  • Zeb||

    I think there are some other possibilities besides those two.

  • Homple||

    I believe there are, too. What's your view on an optimal labor economy?

  • OldMexican||

    Re: Invisible Finger,

    The problem is the minimum wage. It displaces Americans who can't fill jobs that aren't worth the high wage,


    That is only a small part of the explanation.

    The reason there's illegal immigration is only one: The government decided at one point how people were to enter the country. Free immigration would solve this problem overnight. The misgivings about scores of people coming in and trampling on your lawn are mostly fueled by fantasy, since people come to the U.S. already with a potential job offer and room and board from family members or friends (yes, it does pay to be part of an extended family.)

    Minimum wage laws are a factor in the level of employment of the unskilled especially when it comes to the easier jobs. The problem is that the disutility of labor for most potential workers is already too high, because of their parents' income, because of government subsidies or because of their own level of education. Most jobs that undocumented workers are filling do not require a high-school diploma and are, most of the time, back-breaking. Your typical High School drop-out doesn't have the patience or the stamina to work those jobs, or the desire to participate anyway.

  • DenverJay||

    Bullshit. Once upon a time, blue collar workers could make a decent wage in the construction industry. Go to the average job site today, and everyone is speaking Spanish. The radios used to play classic rock until I hated hearing it, but the guys made a living wage. Now, it's salsa music, the wages are falling, and at least half that money leaves the area and is remitted to Mexico.

  • The Bad Captain Madly||

    When Anders Breivik finishes his sentence, perhaps he'd like to immigrate here. We could put him up at the Reason Foundation. The more the merrier!

  • HeteroPatriarch||

    You're awesome, Tulpa. You're smart, good looking and sophisticated, and the girls would totally notice if it weren't for all those damn immigrants in the way. And if they weren't taking all the jobs, you would totally be promoted to senior fluffer.

  • Zeb||

    What? Is there a point in there somewhere?

  • From the Tundra||

    Nope. Just derp.

  • Zeb||

    Unless home really sucks, I would think that US citizen children of illegal immigrants would usually be better off going with their parents when they are deported (though I don't think anyone who hasn't committed any real crime should be deported). When they are old enough to be on their own, they can come back. The people I feel really bad for are those who were brought here as young children and grew up as Americans who end up being deported to countries to which they have no real connection.

  • Sam Haysom||

    Yea I feel real bad for these completely non-existent people.

  • DenverJay||

    Those people do exist; I have known some. I'm on the same side of this debate that you are on: Namely that countries have a right to restrict the level of immigration.
    But you're flat wrong on this one. One guy I worked with in New Mexico, fixing boats, had been brought here when he was 4. Sure, he spoke better Spanish than I do, and might have some family in Mexico, but he'd be almost as lost as me if deported to Mexico.

  • Sam Haysom||

    Ok but wasn't actually deported right. My point was that so few people get deported, as opposed to caught at the border and released that crying crocodile tears for the deported is silly.

  • John Galt||

    No need to worry about illegals or their children. My mother inherited close to $24 million. After my father died (he was atheist) she got tied up with the Christians and end up spending almost every last cent ( that didn't go to Africa and their kids ) on illegals and their kids.

    So much for me inheriting a single penny!

    God bless!

  • John Galt||

    ended up*

  • Sam Haysom||

    Should have had a better will I guess.

  • JFree||

    You really need to get an email out to everyone. I'm pretty sure your rightful money is stuck in a Nigerian bank somewhere and you deserve the assistance of kindly people to get it back

  • dan'o||

    5:31 "Studies show that most immigration to the United States is driven by economic factors, not the attraction of birthright citizenship." This is the derpiest thing I've ever heard on a reason video. I doubt that many would be attracted to Rwanda because of birthright citizenship-- no fucking shit its for economic reasons. The argument made (by the dude I mostly disagree with) was that anchor babies are a tool used to break the law, not an incentive to immigrate.

  • Invisible Finger||

    no fucking shit its for economic reasons.

    Proving you don't have a grasp on what "derp" means.

  • Lorenzo||

    If you're going to quote 5:31, tell from what book. Genesis? Matthew? II Timothy? Clarify.

  • XM||

    The video.

  • Sam Haysom||

    You can eliminated 2nd Timothy from that list right off the bat.

  • Lorenzo||

    I should have eliminated the whole thing. That joke died at the comma.

  • DarrenM||

    I see. So you are arguing they should not be allowed in to begin with.

  • annnaruby||

    upto I looked at the paycheck that said $7231 , I didnt believe ...that...my friends brother had been realy bringing home money parttime on-line. . there aunt started doing this 4 only about eighteen months and resently paid the dept on their mini mansion and bought a great new Bugatti Veyron . go

    ................ www.Wage-Report.com

  • dpbisme||

    They should not be "AMERICAN KIDS"! I mean really,,, the law needs to be changed so that you only become an American is you Mother is in the country legally. I mean only a Idiot Democrat thinks that people that CHEAT and sneak across the border and give birth entitles them to stay in this country.,... The child makes mot decisions here... it is the law breaking parents...

  • EirkKengaard||

    " . . . . In order to provide lasting relief to these American children?" "Subject to the jurisdiction" in 14th amendment should be interpreted to mean existing citizens and lawfully admitted immigrants. We are one of a very few countries unwise enough to grant birthright citizenship.

  • garyg||

    Start making cash right now... Get more time with your family by doing jobs that only require for you to have a computer and an internet access and you can have that at your home. Start bringing up to $8596 a month. I've started this job and I've never been happier and now I am sharing it with you, so you can try it too. You can check it out here...
    www.jobnet10.com

  • agricola||

    never ceases to amaze how all sides buy into the gibberish of mass-media speak. THERE ARE NO ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS. There might be a criminal misdemeanor for crossing the border without permission, but the time limit to prosecute is limited, the evidence is stale or nonexistent, and no one has to take offense, all prosecution is discretionary.

    "Removable Alien" is not a categorical status, it's a statement of possible fact. There is no compulsion to expel anyone, this is again a matter of discretion and policy, and requires due process including a judicial reason why such an extreme action is warranted. Just existing without citizenship or permission fails to show cause for a "removal".

    Nobody had to break any law to find themselves present in the United States. Most people who are called "immigrants" aren't. Everyone who was paroled by ICE into the country breaks no law by staying; everyone who entered anyway breaks no law by remaining. That an option rests in your hands is the opposite of I'm doing something.

    As an example, the High Court in Spain found that expulsion was the extreme end of the law on foreigners, beginning from a low fine up to a high fine; and at the maximum, expulsion. So the prosecution has to show why this particular case merits the full measure. It's the same rule of law everywhere.

    Those who talk about "illegal" and ignore the law itself blow hard out of both sides of their mouths.

  • Win Bear||

    You are a "legal immigrant" if you have an immigrant visa. If you immigrate without an immigrant visa, you are an "illegal immigrant". "Illegal" doesn't mean "criminal" or "prosecutable", it simply means "without legal basis" or "contrary to regulations".

    And while you may or may not be breaking laws if you merely "stay" in the country, you do continue to break laws and regulations if you work without authorization.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

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