An Inconvenient Constitution?

I hear increasing chatter from the extreme right about repealing the 14th amendment. If I read American history correctly, amendments to the constitution have always been used to expand and define individual rights. It concerns me that these same people who supposedly stand for the values of the constitution are the first ones to seek to change that same constitution to restrict individual rights when those rights inconveniently conflict with their philosophical/political bent.

You can't have it both ways. You can't preach a message of freedom to the world and, at the same time, restrict those same freedoms at home. Most countries of the world look to the USA for the best examples of freedom and individual rights. These people and politicians of the far right have accused those on the left of being Fascist. Read your history. Fascists restrict individual rights and are from the conservative right.

To get up and preach freedom to the world while restricting it at home is the ultimate example of hypocrisy. This country once welcomed the poor and destitute but no more! These radicals from the right are nothing but hypocrites who fly in the face of the principles this country was founded on.

Justice for the Children

As an immigrant I am especially interested in the ongoing immigration debate. I still feel that the single biggest problem is the backlog in the system due to a lack of congressional funding but another issue came to my attention last week.

A young man in Arizona who has been in the country since seven years of age voluntarily went back to Mexico to try and immigrate legally. He was brought here, as a child, by his mother. He was educated in Arizona and graduated last year with an engineering degree from Arizona State. His wife and child remain in the US legally and he is being denied permission to immigrate. His hardship petition was denied. What does USCIS define as hardship? Is it not a hardship on his family to be separated from their husband and father?

Apart from the hardship argument another question must be asked in cases such as this. Should a child who is brought here illegally by their parents be held responsible for their unlawful presence? Since when are children held responsible for the crimes or sins of their parents? If the child is raised and educated in the US from an early age and becomes an adult who contributes to society and has committed no crimes, why should he or she be forced to return to a country they do not know. They had no choice in coming here and should not be treated as if they did.

Children of illegals who are raised here should be allowed to stay and not be held to the same standards as their parents. This is one issue that must be addressed in any proposed immigration reform.