Immigration Enforcement Opposed by Three Supremacist Groups
By David Caulkett, VP, Floridians for Immigration Enforcement
Illegal Immigration and AMNESTY is an extraordinarily difficult issue to address because the pro-AMNESTY anti-enforcement arguments come from three different groups, each with unique arguments. Each group has a perceived benefit which they believe trump the rule of law. Nonetheless, the overwhelming majority of citizens oppose illegal immigration and AMNESTY.
1. Moral Supremacists. Often religious groups such as the Catholic Church claim morality as a reason to ignore the rule of law. While human rights and morality advocates may vociferously claim that it is not wrong to cross a border illegally such a right is not provided in the widely accepted United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights which states in Article 13, line 2:
"Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country."
Article 13 does not provide the right for any global citizen to illegally enter any host nation they so choose.
2. Economic Supremacists. Often economic interests claim that their interests supersede the rule of law in order to profit from lower wage foreign labor. For example, the Chamber of Commerce has a massive lobby to insure the flow of illegal foreign labor to a subset of Chamber members who want to hire foreign workers rather than American workers. The downside is that the social costs of supporting masses of foreign laborers accrue to tax payers and local governments in addition to making an uneven playing field for the businesses who abide by the law.
3. Racial/Ethnic Supremacists. Groups like National Council of La Raza (The Race) loudly and actively espouse that Hispanics should not be subject to the rule of law. While Hispanics are widely represented, there are many other ethno-centric groups as well with each group seeking special treatment for their racial, cultural, or ethnic preferences.