Americans first, not illegal aliens first

What country in the world puts the welfare of illegal aliens ahead of its own citizens? The federal government was partially shut down for three days early this week because the Democrats in the U.S. Senate did not want to vote for a spending bill to get the government going unless the bill included a provision giving amnesty to alien children who were brought to the United States illegally. The Senate Democrats were sacrificing the interest of the American people for the benefit of illegal aliens. The Democrats were putting the welfare of illegal aliens first, rather than the welfare of Americans first.

 

Even the liberal, pro-Democratic party newspapers printed denunciations of this political misconduct.

USA Today, quoted Thomas Hicks Jr. of The Hill, as saying:

“Never before in American history has a major political party put the interests of lawbreaking foreign nationals ahead of the interests of law-abiding Americans. Yet that is exactly what the Democrats have done in holding the government hostage to extract special favors for illegal immigrants. . . They call Americans ‘deplorables’ and illegal immigrants ‘dreamers.’ That tells you everything you need to know about the Democrats’ upside-down worldview.”  USA Today 01/22/28 p 7A.

USA Today also quoted Michael Velsmid of Nantucket, Mass. who said:

“The government shutdown is the ‘Schumer shutdown.’ Non-essential government workers will probably not be going to work any time soon. Since they are non-essential, perhaps they can spend more time with their families for good – including politicians from both parties. Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer, with crocodile tears, tried to explain why he needed to tie a ‘dreamer’ legislative issue to the budget, knowing full well that a stand-alone dreamer bill would not get enough votes to pass as written.

“Schumer’s obvious ulterior motive is to get 800,000 new Democratic voters in the pipeline, as many of the dreamers have reached voting age. Nice try, trying to fool the new sheriff in town.”  USA Today 01/22/28 p 7A.

The following day the Senate Democrats capitulated and voted for the spending bill without a provision giving amnesty to illegal aliens.

Promote and protect national interest

America’s immigration laws are intended to promote and protect the national interest. What is the “national interest” in giving amnesty to illegal aliens? Our immigration laws prohibit aliens from entering the United States without a visa unless they are covered by the visa waiver program. Apparently none of these children are covered by the visa waiver program which covers mainly countries whose dominant population is white.

The claim by certain illegal alien coddlers that these children are not at fault has no merit. Fault or lack of it is not the test for being allowed to enter or remain in the United States.

There was an Asian woman who bought green cards from an immigration officer in California for herself and her children. When they were found out, they were ordered deported. The children were not at fault.

There were a number of Filipino children who were brought illegally by their father to the United States. Their father had misrepresented to the U.S. Embassy that the children’s grandfather (who had petitioned their father) was still alive. Somebody reported them to immigration authorities and they were all placed in deportation proceedings. The Immigration Judge asked one of the children whether he knew that his grandfather was dead and that it was illegal for them to come to the United States since their grandfather who had petitioned their father was dead. The child said that he knew his grandfather was dead but did not know that it was illegal for them to come to the United States. The child said that when his father told the children that they were coming to America he did not ask questions. The Immigration Judge ordered him deported anyway, apparently not believing him. The other child was asked the same question and gave the same answer. The Judge also ordered the child deported. We appealed the case to the Board of Immigration Appeals, and asked that they be granted cancellation of removal. We did not ask for amnesty. We pointed out that the Immigration Judge had granted relief to their father, so why should not the children be given relief? We won on appeal.

The immigration laws provide relief for aliens who enter or remain in the United States illegally. Why should not these illegal alien children (reportedly numbering 800,000) seek to avail of the relief provided by existing laws? Why should they be treated differently and more favorably than other children who came to the United States illegally? Each of them should be treated on a case by case basis rather than be given amnesty on a wholesale basis. Otherwise, there would be denial of the equal protection of the laws.

Amnesty breeds contempt for law

The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 gave amnesty to more than three million illegal aliens. The law was premised on the hope that it would stop the flow of illegal aliens. Thirty years later there are an estimated eleven million illegal aliens in the United States. If amnesty is given to them, in another thirty years there will be thirty million illegal aliens. Giving amnesty to lawbreakers breeds more law breakers. Potential lawbreakers will say to themselves “I don’t give a damn about breaking the law, anyway I will be given amnesty if I am caught.”

Amnesty unfair to law abiding

Giving amnesty to lawbreakers is very unfair to the tens of thousands of law abiding immigrants who have been petitioned by their relatives in the United States and whose visas have been approved. They are just waiting for their visas to become available since their quota has been filled up. Many, like the brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens, have been waiting for more than 23 years.

If compassion is to be the primary consideration for allowing aliens to come to the United States, America should take care of these law abiding people first. Law abiding people should be treated better than lawbreakers.

I suggest that the United States government allow such alien relatives with approved visa petitions to come to the United States on a nonimmigrant visa and await their immigrant visas to become available here so that they can be reunited with their families sooner. Such non-immigrant visa may be called “X visa”

         

(Atty. Tipon has a Master of Laws degree from Yale Law School where he specialized in Constitutional Law. He has also a Bachelor of Laws degree from the University of the Philippines. He placed third in the Philippine Bar Examination in 1956. His current practice focuses on immigration law and criminal defense. He writes law books for the world’s largest law book publishing company and writes legal articles for newspapers. He has a radio show in Honolulu, Hawaii with his son Noel, senior partner of the Bilecki & Tipon law firm, where they discuss legal and political issues. Office: American Savings Bank Tower, 1001 Bishop Street, Suite 2305, Honolulu, Hawaii, U.S.A. 96813. Tel. (808) 225-2645. E-Mail: filamlaw@yahoo.com. Website: www.bileckilawgroup.com. He served as a U.S. Immigration Officer. He is co-author with former Judge Artemio S. Tipon of the best-seller “Winning by Knowing Your Election Laws” and co-author of “Immigration Law Service, 1st ed.,” an 8-volume practice guide for immigration officers and lawyers. Atty. Tipon has personally experienced the entire immigration cycle by entering the United States on a non-immigrant working visa to write law books, adjusting his status to that of a lawful permanent resident, and becoming a naturalized United States citizen.)