School Paper - Should illegal immigrants (documented and undocumented) be given pathway to US Citizenship?

[POA 175]

I am writing a paper for finals and I need a controversial topic.  There is so much into and with my research, it seems like they already have a pathway. Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act of 2013. However, I am looking for the pathway that does not include getting married to a USC or getting sponsorship from an employer.

 

I was hoping to get some opinion from this forum for;

 

1. If there is no pathway yet for documented and undocumented illegal immigrants to become legal resident then become a citizen yet on their own, should they be given a way to become legal resident then become a citizen?

2. If there is already a way to do that without an employer and/USC, then no need to answer the question. I will need to change my topic.

 

 

Thank you!

[Roel 7,191]

No. Undocumented or illegal immigrants absolutely should NOT be able to get a green card or citizenship on their own (whatever that means) . It would be offensive to everyone who ever went through all legal steps. 

[Dashinka 23,239]

I agree with @Roel, there should not be a path to LPR or naturalization on their own when a person either enters the country illegally, or overstays on a valid visa.

[Ben&Zian 4,397]

Some conclude that when illegal aliens, who work, illegally mind you, if they pay taxes they should be given a right under the "no taxation without representation", but that's just gaming the system honestly. Mean come on, here illegally, then working illegally, but wanting "fairness" and representation. I agree with @Roel , and a lot of us on here will honestly, they should be no pathway at all. Even through marriage or employment, there needs to be some penalty. I would even go as far to say for visa over stays, leniency and waivers just make it like it never happened when there should be consequences for their choices.

[yuna628 9,528]

Personally I believe that children brought here through no fault of their own and identify as American should be given a pathway. There are some Libertarians that go further, but that's what I'm currently limited to.

[Dashinka 23,239]

12 minutes ago, yuna628 said:

Personally I believe that children brought here through no fault of their own and identify as American should be given a pathway. There are some Libertarians that go further, but that's what I'm currently limited to.

I could agree with LPR, but should they be given a pathway to citizenship?  Also, should they be restricted from petitioning other family members after they turn 21 especially if those other family members continued to stay in the country illegally?

[Ben&Zian 4,397]

8 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

I could agree with LPR, but should they be given a pathway to citizenship?  Also, should they be restricted from petitioning other family members after they turn 21 especially if those other family members continued to stay in the country illegally?

 

I could possibly see this. Biggest thing is if they are allowed citizenship they would immediately petition parents and all illegal relatives and, again then what's the point of illegal status if they can bypass the system. Hence why immigration reform is needed and would help address some of these things. 

[br9k 23]

I think on this forum the only answer you can reliably get is "I got mine"  

 

FWIW - I feel that anyone that wants to live anywhere should be able to do so, legally. Immigration is, by and large, not a "zero sum" game. It's good for everyone (but it will, in short to medium term, inevitably, create the usual human tensions and bring out the worst in some). Less artificial controls and more simple, welcoming, immigration laws would be better for all of us. After all, if no one is "illegal", we would not have to be dealing with what we deal now. 

Edited April 18, 2019 by br9k
Brevity

[yuna628 9,528]

57 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

I could agree with LPR, but should they be given a pathway to citizenship?  Also, should they be restricted from petitioning other family members after they turn 21 especially if those other family members continued to stay in the country illegally?

I think we could work out different possibilities or reasonable restrictions... but I grow concerned Constitutionally with 'restricting' the rights granted once obtaining Citizenship. We don't want a system where some Citizens have more rights than others. But I think it could be reasonable to restrict it in a different way... if it's their parent for instance or some other relative that brought them here, we could say that those people could not obtain citizenship no matter how much petitioning the now-citizen child does, because of that relative's actions. Of course petitioning anyone else that hasn't partaken in illegal activity should be well within the child-now-citizen's rights.

 

Like I said, I am not yet decided on a parent's status here. Some Libertarians believe that they should be able to, so long as the person makes a type of 'amends'. But to me, it was their illegal actions that put their children in this position, no matter how well-meaning or fearful or well-intentioned they might have been. Overall I think we need to develop a very different system than we have now. I had a big discussion with my mom about the 'illegal' situation lately. The problems we have are two-fold - how do we solve the issue of those people who are fleeing here out of desperation due to the abuses of their governments, and how do we solve the issue of the fact that if some people had a lot more options to work or enter legally to this country they might not have chosen the path they did? Keep in mind I am not for a free-for-all.

[Boiler 43,432]

35 minutes ago, br9k said:

I think on this forum the only answer you can reliably get is "I got mine"  

 

FWIW - I feel that anyone that wants to live anywhere should be able to do so, legally. Immigration is, by and large, not a "zero sum" game. It's good for everyone (but it will, in short to medium term, inevitably, create the usual human tensions and bring out the worst in some). Less artificial controls and more simple, welcoming, immigration laws would be better for all of us. After all, if no one is "illegal", we would not have to be dealing with what we deal now. 

We could start out with University Tuition Fees, why should people from a different State pay more?

[Dashinka 23,239]

2 hours ago, yuna628 said:

I think we could work out different possibilities or reasonable restrictions... but I grow concerned Constitutionally with 'restricting' the rights granted once obtaining Citizenship. We don't want a system where some Citizens have more rights than others. But I think it could be reasonable to restrict it in a different way... if it's their parent for instance or some other relative that brought them here, we could say that those people could not obtain citizenship no matter how much petitioning the now-citizen child does, because of that relative's actions. Of course petitioning anyone else that hasn't partaken in illegal activity should be well within the child-now-citizen's rights.

 

Like I said, I am not yet decided on a parent's status here. Some Libertarians believe that they should be able to, so long as the person makes a type of 'amends'. But to me, it was their illegal actions that put their children in this position, no matter how well-meaning or fearful or well-intentioned they might have been. Overall I think we need to develop a very different system than we have now. I had a big discussion with my mom about the 'illegal' situation lately. The problems we have are two-fold - how do we solve the issue of those people who are fleeing here out of desperation due to the abuses of their governments, and how do we solve the issue of the fact that if some people had a lot more options to work or enter legally to this country they might not have chosen the path they did? Keep in mind I am not for a free-for-all.

Then it is easy, limit DACAs to LPR only with no ability to gain citizenship on their own (marriage to a USC could still be an option), then limit them filing F2s.  Btw, there is nothing constitutional related to sponsoring family members in an immigration context.  For instance, you cannot as a USC sponsor aunts, uncles or cousins, so USCs already have restrictions in place.  The OP question is just an academic exercise, I think most folks here would agree immigration reform is warranted, but I am not holding my breath related to Congress actually doing anything.

[arken 4,197]

I also agree to the pathway to the residency that too may be in 10 or more years. Like first just the legal status thru work-permit, pay taxes on their income for next 10 years or so and then be eligible for GC.

 

Yeah, there is no easy answer to this issue. It could only be handled by a complete immigration reform.

 

Main issues:

1. Deporting: Can you deport all 12 million or more? Probably NO Financially and Realistically

2. Doing Nothing: Majority of undocumented adults are are working without paying any taxes on their income. Financial loss to the states and the country. On top of that paying for their healthcare, and other stuffs...

3. Pathway to GC: will it encourage others do the same? May be use some conditions like 10 years after acquiring legal status thru work permit. Debatable

4. Pathway to citizenship: May be NO or if Yes, say 10-15 years after GC

[cyclone27 710]

No pathway nor should there ever be.

 

Anyone who has done things the legal way will tell you that anyone who skips the line deserves a not so welcome from the USA.

 

1. Limit family need visa to spouses and children under 18.

2. No adjustment of status from tourist visa.

3. Birthright citizenship only exists if you have 1 US citizen parent at birth.

4. Make crossing the border illegally a criminal offense and subject to a prison stay with immediate deportation once sentence is served.

 

 

[Unlockable 7,306]

8 hours ago, br9k said:

I think on this forum the only answer you can reliably get is "I got mine"  

 

FWIW - I feel that anyone that wants to live anywhere should be able to do so, legally. Immigration is, by and large, not a "zero sum" game. It's good for everyone (but it will, in short to medium term, inevitably, create the usual human tensions and bring out the worst in some). Less artificial controls and more simple, welcoming, immigration laws would be better for all of us. After all, if no one is "illegal", we would not have to be dealing with what we deal now. 

How would this even be feasibly possible without huge global economical and social impact?

[Boiler 43,432]

4 minutes ago, Unlockable said:

How would this even be feasibly possible without huge global economical and social impact?

It is virtue signalling, either a joke or not thought through.