A few of our stories and columns are now in front of the paywall. We at The Chief-Leader remain committed to independent reporting on labor and civil service. It's been our mission since 1897. You can have a hand in ensuring that our reporting remains relevant in the decades to come. Consider supporting The Chief, which you can do for as little as $3.20 a month.
To the editor:
I think the solution to the immigration crisis is to close the borders to most immigrants as was done in 1924 and allow this second Great Wave to repatriate ("Mob Rule," Letters, The Chief, May 30) . I think if you pay Americans more than starvation wages they will do jobs the undocumented come to this country to do.
I also believe those in the country not legally and/or allegedly not legally deserve respect, dignity and due process of law. Violence against anyone — except for self defense or defense of others — is unacceptable. I also think the United States should work with other countries to address the root causes of illegal immigration.
As for "Lost in Translation," (The Chief, Letters, May 30). Anyone born in the U.S. is a citizen. Period. The crux of my argument, not addressed by Mr. Warren, was the legislative intent of the 14th amendment. In my opinion it was meant to apply to newly emancipated slaves and not the illegal parents of citizens born in the United States. But I am not a Supreme Court justice.
Nat Weiner
9 comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here
Admin
So Mr. Weiner agrees with Mr. Warren's argument. Anyone born in the U.S. is a citizen, period. What was not addressed does not change that.
Tuesday, June 10 Report this
reenjoe
I echo @ Admin's and Mr. Weiner's statements that "Anyone born in the U.S. is a citizen. Period". That is U.S. law.
I doubt anyone believes the 14th Amendment extends citizenship from (U.S. born) children to their (foreign born) parents.
Tuesday, June 10 Report this
krell1349
I am sorry, but I think almost all Americans will not do the jobs illegal/legal immigrants do. Americans don't want to pick fruit, paint houses, install roofs, do construction and other jobs unless the pay is substantially more. This is not going to happen.
Wednesday, June 11 Report this
J.Donne
In paragraph one, you assert that the solution to the illegal immigration crisis lies in closing the borders and facilitating repatriation. I concur with this viewpoint.
Furthermore, you argue that if Americans are paid wages that are sufficient to meet basic needs, they will be willing to take on jobs that undocumented immigrants are drawn to in this country. I agree with this notion.
In paragraph two, you emphasize the importance of treating illegal immigrants with respect, dignity, and due process. I wholeheartedly agree with this sentiment.
Moreover, you advocate for collaboration between the United States and other countries to address the underlying causes of illegal immigration. I wholeheartedly support this approach.
However, I must point out that your assertion that anyone born in the United States is a citizen is not entirely accurate. The “subject to jurisdiction thereof” clause in the 14th Amendment is a subject of ongoing legal debate, and the Supreme Court is expected to clarify this issue in the early summer.
Regarding your point about the 14th Amendment being intended to apply to newly emancipated slaves, I agree with your interpretation.
One crucial aspect that was neither addressed in your letter nor in the discussions surrounding it is the principle of due process. It is important to note that during the Obama administration, approximately 2.5 million immigrants were deported, yet there was minimal civil unrest. This begs the question: why did this occur? The answer lies in the fact that Obama is a Democrat, and Democrats are often given a pass, which is a hypocritical stance.
Wednesday, June 11 Report this
reenjoe
J. Donne's assertion that Obama was "given a pass" on his deportation record due to party affiliation is not accurate. Obama was heavily criticized, by liberals for his failures to provide due process, earning him the ignominious nickname "deporter-in-chief".
Obama's deportations also landed him in court. The ACLU successfully sued the Obama Administration on multiple occasions and was joined by several immigrant's rights groups. To me, Obama was a missed opportunity on immigration, tax equity and the "change" he promised to deliver.
The differences between Obama's and Trump's approaches are the targets and methods. Over 85% of Obama deportees were recent entries. The rest were deportations following a reported offense by an undocumented individual, in some cases very minor offenses. Yet, he also provided some protections, like DACA, for long-term undocumented immigrants and advocated for a path to citizenship for those here decades.
Trump is specifically going after people here for decades. ICE is sent to workplaces and immigrant communities, and they intentionally use heavy-handed tactics for maximum press coverage. A negative reaction to such an approach was predictable and, I believe welcomed by Trump. It distracts attention from his other disastrous policies like the "big, beautiful bill", failures in Ukraine, Gaza, inflation, eliminating FEMA, etc.
Thursday, June 12 Report this
krell1349
You misinterpret the Constitution.
Thursday, June 12 Report this
J.Donne
Undocumented immigrants didn’t create their current immigration dilemma, but they’re not entirely blameless.
The Biden administration and previous administrations’ open border policies are the primary cause of the illegal immigration crisis. People come to America seeking better opportunities, but burning the American flag and waving the Mexican flag isn’t something that should be celebrated.
Those who display the Mexican flag aren’t eager to be deported back to Mexico, while those who set-fire to the American flag are determined to stay in the United States
( an oxymoron ).
Rioters who commit acts of violence, such as setting fire to the American flag, looting, burning cars, and attacking law enforcement officers, are not peaceful protesters; they are violent criminals. Trump waited six days before deploying the National Guard in Los Angeles. If Mayor Karen Bass and Governor Gavin Newsom had responded responsibly when LAPD Chief, Jim McDonnell declared, “we are overwhelmed!” Trump wouldn’t have summoned the National Guard. Governor Gavin Newsom and Mayor Karen Bass, like Nero, fiddled while Los Angeles burned!
Obama’s deportation record
Obama’s administration deported 3.2 million immigrants from 2009 to 2016, focusing on criminals and recent border crossings. Critics argued that this policy tore apart families and disregarded immigrants’ rights. In 2012, 75 to 83% of deportations were non-judicial, lacking “due-process” and leaving immigrants without legal representation or appeal opportunities. Critics argued that this violated fairness, while defendants claimed it was efficient.
Trump’s deportation policies
Trump’s second term aims to deport millions, including criminals and undocumented immigrants, with expanded ICE operations targeting workplaces and communities. Trump’s policies, like Obama’s, face criticism for bypassing due process, with expedited removals and non-judicial deportations remaining common. Critics argue that this risks deporting individuals with U.S. ties without fair trials.
Comparing Immigration Policies
Both Obama and Trump faced criticism for their immigration policies. Obama’s high deportation numbers and reliance on non-judicial removals drew protests from immigration advocates. Trump’s plans sparked outrage due to their scale and perceived cruelty. Both presidents used expedited removals to streamline deportations, often at the expense of legal protections.
Conclusion
Obama’s 3.2 million deportations, with 75-85% lacking due process, set a controversial precedent for efficient immigration enforcement.
Trump’s ongoing policies, which echo this approach, face scrutiny for prioritizing speed over fairness. The debate centers on balancing security and justice. Understanding these facts clarifies the challenges faced by both administrations.
It’s possible that the absence of violent protests during Obama’s administration can be attributed to varying public perceptions and political contexts compared to Trump’s administration.
Friday, June 13 Report this
reenjoe
The "ongoing legal debate" as to whether a newborn delivered in a U.S. hospital is subject to U.S. and state laws exists solely in the minds of Trump and his most extreme supporters.
For the record, the case currently awaiting a SCOTUS decision isn't about birthright citizenship or the legality of Trump's EO ending the practice, per se. Trump is arguing that district judges should not be allowed to impose nationwide injunctions, as they have with regard to his EO. The Trump position is that each state, and even each individual, must seek injunctions separately. That would be chaos; Trump's natural state of being.
Friday, June 13 Report this
J.Donne
Undoubtedly, the Executive Order issued by President Trump regarding birthright citizenship is the primary issue at stake. Secondary to this matter is the concept of a nationwide injunction, which is a legal remedy that compels a court to bind the federal government, even in its interactions with non-parties. In their initial form, nationwide injunctions are employed to restrict the federal government, President Trump, from enforcing a statute or regulation. It remains to be seen how this matter will unfold in court. The Supreme Court is scheduled to rule on this issue in early summer, which is not far away.
Friday, June 13 Report this