To show that I occasionally can be critical of more than just the right, why do some people on the left refer to "undocumented" immigrants rather than "illegal" immigrants?
I have very little sympathy for those who would make illegal immigration a political football, and absolutely none at all for the part of the Arizona law that was struck down, whereby police could have stopped any persons they wanted for any reason, or no reason, and demanded to see their documentation. But, still, we're adults; let's call a spade a spade, to resurrect an expression I haven't used or heard for about four decades. Some immigrants are legal and some are illegal.
The following story, which is taken from a fund-raising email I received, is no less poignant and the incident to which it refers is no less outrageous if the victim is "illegal" rather than "undocumented."
Put another way, if the Border Patrol agents beat a handcuffed man to death, their actions are just as deserving of prosecution if the victim was an illegal immigrant as they are if he was an undocumented immigrant.Last October, a reporter approached The Nation Institute's Investigative Fund with disturbing cell phone video he had obtained. That grainy footage captured a handcuffed man, prone on the ground, being tased and beaten to death by US Border Patrol agents.The victim was Anastasio Hernandez Rojas, a San Diego construction worker, father of five, and undocumented immigrant. Local police ruled his 2010 death a homicide, but then closed their investigation with no agents charged. Earlier this month, the impunity came to an end—with 16 members of Congress demanding a full investigation by the Department of Justice.It was The Investigative Fund that made the difference. We sent the reporter, John Carlos Frey, to the border to investigate Anastasio's death, and we met with producers at the PBS show Need to Know. The result was an April 20 broadcast that sparked a massive national petition drive and an explosion of activism by community groups such as the Southern Border Communities Coalition. Anastasio's mother even flew to Washington, DC, to demand accountability.Since the Need to Know segment aired, John's reporting has gone viral: He published an op-ed in the Los Angeles Times and the story was covered in outlets ranging from ABC News and MSNBC to Univision, the Spanish-language newspaper La Opinion, and the London Daily Mail. Now The Investigative Fund is working with John to expose more troubling deaths at the border.
Heitor and I now refer to each other as "my undocumented husband."
2 comments:
"To show that I occasionally can be critical of more than just the right,"
Gosh, Gerry, you really strike a blow there, what a criminal offense to use "undocumented" versus "illegal." But, that is the worst you can find from the liberal causes, correct?
I do like the "undocumented husband" thing, tho...
As I think you know, I have a problem with the "illegal" part of "illegal alien." To do something that is illegal should cause people to pause and wonder what else is being done illegally. Most of us are not given a free pass when we do something illegal simply because we were good citizens in some other way.
In regard to your criticism and continued worry about the Supreme Court, it is sort of like you approve of their decisions recently, but don't trust them to make the "correct" decision in the future because of your bias. At least you can depend on Kagan to vote in a particular way. Let's see, who nominated her?
You heaped some pretty heavy critism recently on Roberts, but what happened? Who appointed him? Also, who appointed Earl Warren?
I'm not following all of what you say about the Supreme Court and my opinions about it. Which of my many biases about the Supremes prevents me from trusting them to make which correct decision in the future? But you're probably right; I don't trust this court.
I don't have any reason to think that Kagan is any more dependable in her votes than are any of her colleagues. At least you can depend on Kagan to recuse herself when it is appropriate...as in the Arizona case.
Most presidents probably had occasion at some time to regret their Supreme Court appointments. As for your question about Earl Warren, Eisenhower was quoted as saying that appointment was the single greatest mistake of his presidency (not sure when he said it; it may have been while he was still president and before he made even greater ones.).
I am very wary of the "reassessments" of Roberts that opinionaters are making as a result of his healthcare vote. His rejection of the Commerce Clause justification is still very dangerous, and has the potential for a lot of mischief down the road. I also think his rationale for rejecting the Medicaid portion of the act is totally specious.
Post a Comment