IMMIGRATION AND PRINCIPLES OF JUSTICE

Varying Views

Many of us living in non-border states of the U.S. can sympathize with the challenges of a balanced and enforceable U.S. immigration policy. At the same time many of us—including many legislators on both sides of the aisle—recognize the need to address the undocumented worker, like many other countries do, with international economic principles, rather than with legal or military measures. Laws and fences will not keep people who wish to cloth and feed their families from seeking gainful employment. Our good New England poet recognized the clash of opinion regarding fences, walls and boundaries: some who say, “Good fences make good neighbors”, while others claim, “Something there is that doesn't love a wall.”

Passionate Economist vs. Constitutional Judge
Two distinct commentaries—one by Dr. Terry Lowell, the other by Judge Andrew Napolitano, both made in 2010—are making the internet rounds. See them both at http://www.darkskiesblog.com/2010/08/13/professor-terry-j-lovell-obama-and-holder-are-taking-the-side-of-mexico-and-the-drug-cartels-in-suing-the-state-of-arizona-video/
The passionate band-wagoning commentary by Dr. Terry J. Lovell, Professor of Business and Economics at Yavapai College in Prescott, Arizona, rather than clearing the air about the Federal legal action in suing the State of Arizona over its immigration law (SB1070), appears to say suit by the Federal government:
1. Is a concession to the drug cartels.
2. Favors the Mexican government.
3. Shows the U.S. government is unwilling to defend its citizens.
4. Is meant to aid and abet criminal element in their threats against Sheriff Paul Babeu.
5. Is opposed to Federal Statutes.
As a balance to Professor Lowell’s rant, some may find it worthwhile to hear a juridical commentary on the Federal Lawsuit of Arizona; it’s worthwhile to listen to Judge Andrew Napolitano as interviewed on Fox TV regarding the constitutional ramifications of Arizona’s SB1070.
Judge Napolitano is not related to U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano, who, it’s reported, he sometimes jokingly calls "Cousin Janet."

Congressional Research Service

Another commentary from the Congressional Research Service is also more balanced than that of Prof. Lowell. It can be found at
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/topics/science/immigcrs.pdf
The report titled “State Efforts to Deter Unauthorized Aliens: Legal Analysis of Arizona’s S.B. 1070” states:
The enactment of S.B. 1070 sparked significant legal and policy debate. Supporters argue that federal enforcement of immigration law has not adequately deterred the migration of unauthorized aliens into Arizona, and that state action is both necessary and appropriate to combat the negative effects of unauthorized immigration. Opponents argue, among other things, that S.B. 1070 will be expensive and disruptive, will be susceptible to uneven application, and can undermine community policing by discouraging cooperation with state and local law enforcement. In part to respond to some of these concerns, the Arizona State Legislature modified S.B. 1070 on April 30, 2010, through the approval of H.B. 2162. This report discusses the major provisions of S.B.1070, as modified by H.B. 2162, and the legal and constitutional considerations possibly implicated by their implementation. The report focuses primarily on those provisions that require state enforcement of federal immigration law and impose criminal penalties for immigration-related conduct, and discusses preemption issues that might be raised by these measures.

Personal Experience

This commentary is inspired by a number of experiences. In the 60’s, as secretary for a migrant council in a rural area of Illinois, I visited “migrant camps” and saw the simple dignity of families who—in an effort to provide for their families, including small children who worked the fields with mom and dad—followed the migrant stream, arriving in the fields to harvest asparagus. They slept in converted chicken coups with no more than a dual burner propane-fueled hot plate to fend off the cold of spring nights. These conditions they accepted not because they wanted to, but because it was the work they knew and did to raise their family.
Forty years ago in a pastoral position, I worked closely with the former Immigration and Naturalization Service [now U.S. Immigration Customs Enforcement] learning the proper procedure for assisting the scores of people—mainly from Latin America—who came to us for assistance in completing their paper work petitioning for legal permanent residence. Back then, INS officials unofficially admitted the need to address complexity of the U.S. immigration law.
In 1992, I worked closely with police community relations in the city where I lived. I had taken part in the Citizens’ Police Academy and became aware of the challenges of law enforcement. I was also executive director of a service agency for the large Hispanic population of the community. There was a percentage of the population represented by letters to the editor to the local paper who commented on the number of crimes by “illegal aliens.” My contact with the Hispanic community made me aware these commentaries were long on passionate bias and short on true statistics. Adding to this anti-immigrant sentiment, a community organization began researching the number of traffic stops by police leading to detentions because of “lack of papers.” The city was sued based on the large number of traffic stops of people “who looked foreign.”
The pastoral experience in an inter-cultural context made me recognize that every human being has dignity and deserves to have the means to support family. My experience with law enforcement raised my consciousness about the inadequacies of applying legal approaches alone in solving community problems.

PRINCIPLES OF JUSTICE
Rather than heated commentary using half-truths, spending more money on walls and militaristic law-enforcement, those of us who are children of immigrants—most of us—might consider reviewing the principles upon which to base actions, thereby better serving the efforts toward solutions. Some sources for organizations—both Non-Church based and Church-based—working to formulate principles and advocating for human rights based on those principles are listed here.
Non-Church Sources
Immigrant Rights: http://discoverhumanrights.org/sites/7cc8fb84-899d-457d-a486-470ccb03fb16/uploads/Migrant_Rights_Fact_Sheet.pdf
Office of the High Commission on Human Rights
http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/cmw/docs/HLMigration/MigrationDevelopmentHC'spaper.pdf

Presidential
http://www.humanrights.gov/2011/08/04/presidential-proclamation-suspension-of-entry-as-immigrants-and-nonimmigrants-of-persons-who-participate-in-serious-human-rights-and-humanitarian-law-violations-and-other-abuses/

Church Sources
USCCB: http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/get-involved/get-more-information/migration-and-refugee-legislation.cfm

Our Sunday Visitor
“Answering tough questions about immigration”
An article in Q&A format by Bishop John C. Wester, of the Diocese of Salt Lake City and is chairman of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Committee on Migration
http://www.justiceforimmigrants.org/documents/wester-interview.pdf

Franciscan Holy Name Province: http://www.hnp.org/jpic/immigration-action.cfm
In Chapter 2011 the Province formalized its commitment by passing the following statement:
"The Holy Name Province of the Order of Friars Minor, as a corporate entity as well as through our local communities and ministries, make clear our support for and defense of documented and undocumented immigrants to the United States."

What's In a Tenth Anniversary?

So now, after the earthquake, we're gearing up for Hurricane Irene. . . supposed to hit the coast of CT south of us about 50 miles. Earthquakes and hurricanes. . .hmmmm, sounds like what Elijah encountered in his cave refuge [I Kings 19]. Surprising, isn't it, that we aren't hearing more from fundamentalist evangelists proclaiming "the voice of the Lord is speaking to us his condemnation, etc., etc., etc." It's always impressive to me that Elijah doesn't recognize the voice of the divine presence in the terrifying cataclysmic forces of nature's wrath. He covers his face with his cloak only after the mysterious and ultimately ungraspable "light silent sound," goes out of his cave and, only then hears the question, "Why are you here?" Our theophanies may well be coming when we forsake the cave of our false security and listen in the stillness. . . if we but notice.