A Christian Response to Illegal Immigration

   

     Imagine that you are a parent. Your home country is plagued by poverty to the point that your friends and neighbors regularly die of hunger, preventable diseases, and dirty water. What jobs are available do not pay enough to support your family. Crime is rampant to the point it is unsafe for your teenage daughters to leave the home alone. And corruption is so common that these criminals are rarely punished. Education is mandatory, but insufficient. Healthcare is prohibitively expensive. There is a possibility of a better, safer, more secure future for your children a few hundred miles away. What kind of parent would you be if you did not risk everything for the chance your children could have a better future? What kind of law could keep you from at least trying?

          People do not illegally immigrate because they are bored and want to travel; they do it because it is the best chance for themselves and their families. Ironically, illegal immigration is somewhat self-limiting because of these. As immigrants (legal and illegal) have built lives for themselves in the United States, they often make enough money to send it back to their families in their home countries. This “remittance” is billions of dollars that is poured from these workers int the United States into Latin American and Caribbean economies and have contributed to more stable economic situations in many of these countries--- giving the United States better trade partners and new markets for their products. Additionally, it creates a more stable environment, which has resulted in an overall decrease in immigration from these countries.

          Which is all well and good, but these people are coming here illegally. “Why don’t they just come here legally?” They would love to, but that is not an option the United Sates offers. A person cannot simply “immigrate” to the United States. They must have a reason to be here: a job (normally white collar) waiting for them, a family member who is a United States’ citizen, or refugee status. There is no category of legal immigration for a blue-collar worker who just wants a better life for his family or a bright-eyed young woman with big dream, a can-do attitude, and little education. There is no “line” for them to wait in for legal entry.  

Even figuring that out is difficult because the system is incredibly complicated. For example, a skilled worker (such as a doctor or an engineer) can come under a H-1B visa, which is sponsored by their employer. If they lose their job, they lose their legal status. Or a family member of an American citizen can apply for a K-1, K-2, or IR1 visa. Or a student may come here on a F-1 visa but will have to leave once their school is done. But they can stay over the summer breaks. If they want to stay after college, they need to switch to an H-1B visa. Confused yet? There are 185 different types of visas--- each with their own forms and rules. Without the help of a specially trained immigration lawyer (a normal lawyer will not do), it is almost impossible to come here legally on any kind of permanent bases even if you fit one of the three special categories that can.

Most visas are issued for a set time and must be renewed. But the renewal process is often as or more complicated than the initial process. More than half of those without legal status (62%) entered the United States legally but did not or could not renew their visa. This is not always by choice. A social worker friend of mine with a masters with the help of an immigration lawyer attempted to fill out a visa renewal for a mutual friend… and it was rejected because something was filled out wrong. Immigration services did not specify what. A pastor friend of mine overstayed his visa because with his pastor’s salary and his wife working full time, they could not afford the fees and lawyers to renew it--- they had been in the United States for fifteen years.

Additionally, not all illegal immigrants came here by their own choice. Often, they immigrate as families and the children are considered as illegal as the parents. These children may have no memory of a life, home, or cultural identity other than the United States. 1.1 million children in the United States are considered criminals for simply being here even though they had no agency in that choice. Under DACA, there was a path to protect these children from paying for the crimes of their parents, but this program has been halted in the last four years.

If we forget for a moment that not having legal status is considered a crime, illegal immigrations commit less crimes than native born Americans. They pay far more in income taxes than they collect in welfare and other social services. They fill gaps in the United States working population that native workers do not want and are considered by economists a vital part of the US economy. To remove them would cause economic collapse.

          In the fourth century, St. Augustine makes the claim that “an unjust law is no law at all.” This statement (which may even be older than him) has been quoted and referenced so many times in American history that it is considered a legal maximum and an obvious truth.  So, is the United States’ immigration policy an “unjust law”? It is certainly an impractical one since enforcing it would cause a nation-wide recession. But is it unjust? If a country tells someone to “just come here legally,” yet there is not immigration option that makes that possible, that is an unjust requirement. If you punish children for crimes their parents committed, that is an unjust prosecution. If a law is so insanely unworkable that even trained professionals cannot navigate it, it an unjust system.

          The alternative to the current system need not be wide-open door immigration. (Although, that system did lead to massive economic growth in the nineteenth century.) The alternative is a system that simply works. That allows people to get in line for a better life. That is navigable and transparent. That supports the US economy rather than hurts it. That gives families living in difficult situations options.  Until there is a system that work, people will work around the current system.

          In his excellent recent work Reading While Black, Esa McCaulley exponents on Romans 13—the often-cited “submit to governing authorities” passage. Among his many insights is the realization that this passage is about how a people should treat a government and how a government should treat its people. The government should ensure that people who do nothing wrong are “free from fear,” that its leaders are serving for the people’s good, and that they only bring punishment on the wrong-doer (Rom 13:1-7). It is a contract between the government and the people, and if the government fails in its responsibility, the people are not obligated to obey its unjust laws.

What stands out to me is that Paul does not say the “people who follow the law” vs “people who break the law”; he says those who do nothing wrong vs. those who do wrong. In Paul’s time, Christians were breaking the law by claiming the name of Christ. There is a morality that is higher than a human law. I, like most Christians believe the government should be respected and obeyed in all things morally neutral and in all morally good laws (which are most). But when parents are put in a position between following a law and providing for their family, when young adults are place in a position when following a law would mean leaving the only home they know because of something their parents’ chose for them, when a system is so complicated that a pastor literally cannot afford to follow the law, there may be a higher law at work.

https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/frequently-requested-statistics-immigrants-and-immigration-united-states#Immigrants Now and Historically

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/08/20/key-findings-about-u-s-immigrants/