Debate Desk
Is Deportation Cruel and Un-American, or Part of Any Lawful System?
Every country removes those who have no right to stay; the question is doing it fairly, with due process, and applying the same rules to everyone.
The claim
Critics say removal tears apart families, sends people to places they barely know and treats workers who have built lives here as criminals. A nation of immigrants, they argue, should find a way for long-settled residents to stay.
The answer in three points
- Removal is the ordinary consequence of violating immigration law, and every country applies it. A law without enforcement is a suggestion. Americans who waited years to immigrate lawfully have a stake in seeing the same rules apply to others.
- Fairness requires process. People facing removal are entitled to a hearing, to present evidence and to appeal, and conservatives should insist the government follow the law at each step. Enforcement and due process are not opposites.
- Priorities are a legitimate choice. Government has limited resources, and focusing on those who committed serious crimes or who have final orders is reasonable. But a policy of not enforcing the law at all, announced in advance, invites more illegal entry.
Compassion and law are not rivals here. A country can treat every person in custody with dignity, give each a fair hearing, and still insist that the final order of a court be carried out. The unfair system is one where some follow the rules and some are excused for no reason anyone can state.
The numbers
- The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, as amended, defines the grounds on which a noncitizen may be removed, according to the text of the statute.
- The Department of Homeland Security's Office of Homeland Security Statistics reports that ICE carried out hundreds of thousands of removals in some years of the past decade, with levels varying by administration.
- The Executive Office for Immigration Review, which runs the immigration courts, reported a backlog of several million cases in recent years.
What they will say next
"These are long-settled neighbors." Many are, and people feel for them. The law already offers cancellation of removal in certain cases and Congress can write more. What it cannot do is declare that entering illegally carries no consequence after enough time has passed, because that rewards the act.
"The system is slow and arbitrary." Agreed, and a backlog of this size is itself unjust to everyone waiting. Adding judges and moving cases faster serves both fairness and enforcement.
"It is cruel to separate families." Parents of citizen children are subject to the same law as anyone else, and families can leave together. Humane treatment in custody is a duty. The policy goal should be to remove the incentive to cross in the first place.
"Other generations were welcomed." Earlier generations came under laws that also had limits, such as inspection at Ellis Island, and many were turned away. Every era has enforced entry rules in its own way.