Sometimes the law is truly an ass, and this is one of those times:
(CNN) — A high school valedictorian’s plans to study medicine at a California state university have run headlong into the federal government’s attempts to return him and his family to Armenia.
“I haven’t been in Armenia since I was 2, so I don’t really know anything about the place,” said Arthur Mkoyan, 17. “All I’ve seen is just videos my mom has watched on the Internet.”
Mkoyan’s long-term plans were turned upside down one morning in April when two immigration officers arrived at the door of his family’s house.
“They took both of my parents, and they released my mom because she had to take care of us, since me and my brother are minors,” he recalled. “But instead they took my dad away to a detention center in Arizona.”
Mkoyan, who has a grade-point average above 4.0 — extra credit for Advanced Placement classes makes that possible — is set to graduate next week from Bullard High School in Fresno, California. VideoWatch students from Arthur’s school talk about his case »
Ten days later, Immigration and Customs Enforcement plans to deport him and his family to the Armenian capital city of Yerevan, the same city his family fled in fear 16 years ago.
His crime ? Thirteen years ago, when Arthur was 3 years old, his parents fled Armenia in the face of ethnic conflict and harassment and came to the United States for the same reason immigrants have been coming here for hundreds of years, they were looking for a new life:
They arrived in the United States in 1995 on six-month tourist visas, according to Virginia Kice, a public information officer with Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
The family settled in Fresno, where Mkoian worked as a truck driver and his wife worked in a jewelry store. They set about living their lives, which soon included a younger brother for Arthur.
But after the visas expired, the family’s application to remain in the United States was denied. In 2002, an immigration judge ruled that they had no legal basis to remain in the country, Kice said.
After their application to the Board of Immigration Appeals was rejected, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals last year denied their petition for a hearing.
The court was unpersuaded by the father’s assertion that he might still be subject to reprisal if he were to return.
So because of this, a man, a boy, who barely has any memory of Armenia and has proven that he has a lot to contribute the country he considers his home is being told that we don’t want him here.
There is, at this point, one last option but the odds aren’t good:
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-California, may attempt to pass a “private bill” that would allow the family to remain in the United States.
“Our office is looking into the case,” said Scott Gerber, a spokesman for the senator.
But the odds against it are long. There is “almost no chance” that the family’s quest for a private bill will succeed, said Daniel Kowalski, editor-in-chief of Bender’s Immigration Bulletin.
“Very few are being passed,” he said.
In fact, of the 21 private immigration bills introduced last year, none was enacted. In 2006, 117 were introduced, and none was enacted; in 2005, 98 were introduced, and four were enacted.
But the filing itself would buy the family time, since it suspends any efforts to deport the family until the bill’s fate is determined.
If ever there was a case where an exception should be made, it’s this one.
Tell you what. If we can agree to throw all the politicans who have REFUSED to enforce our immigration laws out of the country, I will gladly concede that we ought to let this nice young man stay. His parents, however, knowingly broke the law and put their son in this situation. They have to go back to Armenia.
Tom,
They are, I submit two different issues.
If anything, I would say that this case supports my belief that our immigration laws are, in fact, too restrictive, too bureaucratic, and too unrealistic.
I agree with the too bureaucratic part. The fact this case dragged on all these years is absurd. I also have no problem with with skilled people looking fresh opportunities coming here. Nonetheless, I think that believing just what you hear from one news story is not realistic.
If we allow people use nothing more than the socalled fact that crooks are after them as an excuse to immigrate to United State, we will most likely lose all control over the process. Our bureaucrats cannot investigate such claims. Should we just take their word for it? Why?
Let’s for a moment assume the story about why this family left Armenia is true. There was no safe place for them in all of Armenia? That is doubtful.
Was running the best thing? Supposedly, some people in this DMV were corupt. That’s all that chased them out of Armenia? When we are confronted with such corruption in the United States, where do we run? Would you run? Do we really want our nation to be populated by a people who will not stand and fight corruption?
Tom,
There was a time when people came to the United States because they wanted to start a better life for themselves and their family members.
Now, people who have that desire are considered criminals.
It’s unfortunate that so many people think that’s a bad thing and want to shut the door. There were people like that around in the 1890’s too, and if they’d been listened to, my great-grandparents probably wouldn’t have been allowed in this country.
And if you spent some time learning about Armenia then you’d know that there really aren’t any safe places there.
That was a time when America did not have a big welfare state. I see little point in being taxed into oblivion to support immigrants.
Let’s go back to basics. The reason we have this supposedly insolvable problem is so cheapskate employers can hire cheap labor. When native born Americans are willing to work for the same wages as illegal immigrants, we both know the problem will magically go away.
No safe places in Armenia? Unless you live in downtown Washington D C, I will grant you that the United States is safer. Nonetheless, the last time I checked plenty of people live and breath in Armenia. Somehow, some way, even though most of the world is poorer and less safe than the United States, billions of people seem to survive and multiply. How do decide which ones deserve refugee status and entry across our borders?
Who said I support the welfare state ? And where is the evidence that immigrants, legal or illegal, even use the welfare state. By definition, undocumented immigrants can’t use services like Medicaid.
I’m just not one of those who thinks we need to end 300 years of American openness to immigration because of the welfare state, which is going to collapse anyway regardless of how many immigrants we let in.
Personally, I’ve come to the conclusion that people are blaming immigrants for problems that they have no connection to, which is pretty much how we’ve treated them since the country began.
Evidence. Ahh yes, evidence. The child was a valedictorian in an Armenian school, right?
You say that there is no evidence. Then you pass over the fact our laws do not allow its collection. We do not charge tuition in our public school system, and public schools do not check immigration status. Such is also with healtcare and other public services.
The Supreme Court has already ruled that children cannot be barred from schools based on immigration status. And I would think that the fact that this kid is a valedictorian who could actually contribute something to this country would count for something.
But no, he’s one of the dirty foreigners so we have to send him home.
You know, we may as well just pack up the Statue of Liberty and send it back to France if that is the attitude that’s going to prevail in this country, because that’s not what America used to stand for.
Tom,
Nothing personal, it’s just that I think its incredibly sad that the United States of America is on the road to becoming something quite different from the country it used to be and this anti-immigrant bias is just one example of it.
Tom wrote-
“You say that there is no evidence. Then you pass over the fact our laws do not allow its collection. We do not charge tuition in our public school system, and public schools do not check immigration status.”
Both the mother and father were gainfully employed, that means they paid payroll taxes. Its impossible to go through life in California without paying sales taxes. If they owned a home, they paid property taxes. I can go on…..
The family were taxpayers. Try again.
Bill
Nothing personal. LOL! You suggest I am a racist, but it is nothing personal.
You can go back George Washington and find an example of someone who was concerned about the proper assimulation of newcomers. Because of its cultural heritage, the United States is special. When you talk about Armenia being unsafe, do you ever bother to consider why?
When people can just hike across the border, when perhaps 15 percent of the Mexican population is illegally in the United States, we have security and assimulation issues. We also have public officials who are neglecting their oath of office. When our elected official refuse to enforce the Law. When they lie to us and say they cannot do their job, we have a problem.
You say to do not support the welfare state. Have you considered the implications of swamping our nation with poorly educated, low wage workers? If we ever allow these people citizenship, how will they vote?
Racism? Anti-immigrant bias? That is the best argument you can muster. In favor of what? Wide open borders? Phooey!
Bill, have you considered how hard it is to get to the United States from Armenia? It takes fairly capable people to bring a family from there to here. Unfortunately, most of the people coming here these days come from nearby for low wage jobs.
Consider what should be obvious. If you are an educated person who can get a decent job in your own country, why leave and come to the United State, particularly when immigration quotas discourage it? For all practical purposes, only uneducated poor people come here illegally.
I didn’t use the word racism, because it’s pretty clear that you would oppose an immigrant from Sweden as quickly as you’d oppose one from Mexico.
The “cultural heritage” of the United States, as you put it, has been one that has welcomed immigrants from all over the world; including unsafe places.
Of course, those who came from certain areas weren’t always as welcome. My great-grandparents from Eastern Europe were referred to as “dirty Huns” by the Welsh and Irish who lived in the areas of Northeastern Pennsylvania that they ended up in — even though Bohemia and Slovakia were neither German nor Hungarian.
As for all those “poorly educated, low wage” workers — that’s the same thing we dealt with 100, 80, 60 years ago when the immigrants were coming from Italy and Eastern Europe. Those people did just fine after a generation or two notwithstanding, and in spite of, the people who didn’t want them here in the first place.
Anyone who wants to come here and make an honest living for their family should be allowed to do so. Its the same rule that helped create the greatest nation on the planet and I don’t see any reason why we should change it.
And, oh yeah, good luck sending 20 million illegal immigrants home because we both know that’s never going to happen.
Tom,
Having met actual human beings who have come here from Armenia and other former Soviet Republics, your assertion that it is possible for someone who offends the wrong person to have a normal life in those countries would, to them, be sadly laughable.
Tom,
Yes or no, do you favor any immigration at all and under what rules ?
Doug, I am not even going to try to write up a complete set of rules. I am not King, and I do not want the job. Instead, I will address the purpose I think our immigration laws should serve.
Some people look at Statue of Liberty and get dreamy-eyed. It never quite was that way. Look at all the descendants of former slaves. From the point of view of voluntary immigrants, immigration may be about the search for a better life. However, from the point of view of our political leadership, immigration has always been about cheap labor.
Given our current welfare laws (and they are what they are), from the point of view of taxpayers, the words on the Statue of Liberty simply do not make sense. The tired and poor huddled masses need too many public services. Moreover, if these people come to our nation in large enough numbers, uneducated, and unable to speak English; they will in time roil our political system.
Ours is now a well-populated nation. We do not need new citizens just to populate the landscape or for cheap labor. So I think we should strive to attract well-educated, productive people. I think the goal of our immigration policies should be to encourage and build diplomatic and trade relationships with other nations.
Only under exceptional circumstances should we let in poor, uneducated people. Sometimes refugees simply cannot stay in their home country. Sometimes to return or to make refugees stay in their home nation is tantamount to murder. I want no part of that. However, since the U.S. 9th Circus Court of Appeals heard this case, I seriously doubt returning this family back to Armenia will result in their deaths.
What I most of object to about this whole story is the way the legal system has dragged on and on. And it is still dragging on. And that is in fact our current immigration policy. Do nothing. So employers can pay illegals as little as possible — and exploit them — we leave illegal immigrants in second-class Limbo.
[...] June 7, 2008 · No Comments I have been exchanging words over at Below the Beltway. See Immigration Insanity = Justice Denied. [...]
Tom,
So I am correct in assuming that you would be in favor of even further restrictions on immigration ?
You do realize that this is the same thing that people said about the uneducated poor people who came here from Ireland, Italy, Germany, Poland, Eastern Europe, Russia, and Asia ?
Even under the current system, there are exceptions that can be made, though, and this case, involving a high school
valedictorian who was three years old when his parents made the decision to stay in the US illegally is one of those certainly strikes me as being one of them.
Sending him back to a country that he has no memory of or connection to beyond a family name, and denying him the opportunity to make the contribution to this country that he’s obviously capable of making is, well……
It’s un-American in my opinion.
Or at least it doesn’t represent the America that I know.
I’m here to declare the Sicillian side of my family originally came over to escape the MAFIA, and no, there WAS no safe place to hide. Countries, no matter what size, provide few permanant hiding places.
Tom, I’m not sure where you are getting all this “welfare” stuff, but workers, legal or not, are not on welfare because they are earning an income. And workers who can become hired legally have at least a shot at getting health and other benefits that help keep families and social service programs healthy.
Second, ESOL and civics classes are inexpensive and even free for those who want to learn. Even now, those classes are packed full of non-native-English speakers who want to learn, assimilate, and succeed in this very different culture.
Third, “deport them all” (and I’m not saying you are suggesting this) is neither financially sound nor realistic (though if you want to deport the people who have never enforced the laws to begin with, please, don’t let me step in your way). The fact is, since the precedent has been set for decades, we need to reform immigration law and secure the borders.
Finally, this story about the Armenian boy and his family is a tragic example of the way our system can work against people in general, not just immigrants. There are stories like these from virtually every sector and these stories are evidence of a sick system that we had best cure before we fall terminally ill as a nation.
Tom,
To follow up on Katherine’s point.
The bricklayers and carpenters and roofers that are building houses in the community that I live in may, probably are, here illegally.
And you know what ?
I don’t care.
They do quality work and it shows. Anyone who is willing to be outside in 100 degree heat laying bricks is a better man than I in several respects. And if they want to live here, fine by me.
Katherine,
Your family’s story is, as I am sure you know, not unique.
I personally know of a woman in her 80’s who has been in the United States since before she was a teenager. She was sent here by her parents because of a “Black Hand” vendetta along with her sister. Somehow, the men who had a vendetta against her family managed to find the sister and take her back to Sicily and, until two years ago, the two of them didn’t even know that the other existed.
From what I’ve learned, that’s basically what the situation is in Armenia, Georgia, and some of the other former Soviet Republics. There are entire regions that are basically under the control of criminals and, if you get on their bad side, there isn’t anything the government there can do to help you.
There was a time when the United States was a refuge from such places. Apparently, some people want to end that practice.
My primary concern is making the USA and then the world better a better place. I want our immigration law to be just like any other law. I want our immigration law to protect the rights of American citizens, and I want our immigration law to benefit America.
So far you have asked me to address your humanitarian concerns. You have addressed none of my concerns, waiving away almost any issue, cost particularly, as trivial. Instead, you have taken a unique case and acted as if it represented the whole issue. That is preposterous.
Some of this is comical. We are suppose to be scrupulously careful not to assume people who are not of Northern European descent are not illegal immigrants. Yet the obvious fact is that we have a steadily increasing population of Spanish speaking people. We all know you have to speak English to qualify for American citizenship. We also know the quota for legal immigrants is relatively small. So where are all these people coming from? And why, when they entered illegally, are we suppose to treat them like they belong here?
What problems do you see? What reforms do you propose?
Tom,
Since your primary concern seems to be the high cost of the welfare state, there really is only one solution, and it’s one that no Republican politician in Washington is willing to admit to:
Eliminate the welfare state
Even if we stopped immigration tomorrow and sent every illegal immigrant home, it’s doomed to failure and bankruptcy.
That’s why I don’t consider any appeal to the “cost” of the welfare state relevant to a debate on immigration.
Now, if you want to invigorate the economy, I’ve got an idea, and it’s the same one that worked in the 19th Century and most of the 20th Century — let people who want to work here and contribute and build a future do so.
It worked before, it will work again.
And if you want an example of what happens in a modern industrial society that doesn’t allow any immigration, I suggest you take a look at Japan — which is dying a long, slow, and, in the end painful, demographic death because of its centuries old cultural chauvinism.
Doug – Your solution, “eliminate the welfare state,” has to be implemented before it makes any sense whatsoever to open up the borders.
I don’t know whether or not Japan is dying. I do know that Japan is overpopulated, rocky and mountainous. Like the people most modern industrial societies, the people of Japan have no economic incentive to have children. So their population is aging.
There are few if any historical parallels for what is going on in Japan. To predict the death of Japan, however, seems more than an little bit premature.
What is going on in Western European is in many respects more similar to what is going on in the United States. Like Japan and the United States, the native populations have little incentive to have children. Like the United States and unlike Japan, hordes of immigrants are entering Western Europe.
What makes the United States different from Europe is that we have a tradition of immigration and assimilation. For the most part the new immigrants are being put to work and the second generation, at least, is allowed full citizenship. We are also fortunate in that most of the new immigrants do not come here immersed in a religion that teaches extreme hostility to our culture. Nonetheless, too many new immigrants do not understand our language or culture. So bringing in all who want to come entails great risk. It presumes that our public education system will teach the second generation, at least, what it needs to know. Given the increasing numbers, that seems overly optimistic.
Since the vast majority of immigrants are illegal, and the economics are complex, the costs and benefits are largely unknown and hidden. Instead, we have lots of people making unsubstantiated assertions. Common sense, however, dictates that as an illegal activity, immigration is more problematic than beneficial. We have a situation where the people benefiting from illegal immigration are subverting any effort to enforce our immigration laws. That teaches new immigrants not to take our laws and our culture seriously. What immigrants may learn from this experience is that we believe the end justifies the means.
Like it or not, immigration is not always a good thing. Slavery, for example, involved bringing people here AGAINST THEIR WILL. Now we have a different variation on the theme. We are being forced to accept immigrants, AGAINST OUR WILL. So I predict more problems than benefits.
With all due respect your comparison of slavery and immigration is so fundamentally absurd that I’ve just got to assume that you’re using hyperbole rather than making a serious argument there.
You’re right, America does have a history of assimilation, and that assimilation is still going on, check out this post I wrote last month and the story that it links to:
http://tinyurl.com/6gjrme
Have you ever thought to ask yourself why people are coming here, or want to come here, and why they’re even willing to break the law to do it ?
Because they want to live here,that’s why. Not because of free health care, or schools, or welfare benefits, but because they can make a living here and start a new life. Europeans did it for centuries and it worked out to everyone’s benefit. Yes, there were disruptions on both sides, but they worked themselves out then and they will this time too.
Doug – The study by the Manhattan Institute makes an invalid assumption. It presumes the existence of accurate data. How do you get accurate data on ILLEGAL immigrants? If the Manhattan Institute can do it (with census data), why isn’t our government able find illegal immigrants and fine their employers? At one and the same time, the problem is easy and impossible? We can measure the cultural assimilation (What is the numerical term for that?) of people who do not want to be found, but we cannot kick them out of the country?
I did not make a comparison with slavery lightly. Slavery comes in many forms and degrees. What is essentially involved is a situation where a laborer is unable to get a fair day’s wages for a fair day’s work. Whereas an outright slaves have almost no negotiating power, illegal immigrants, because of their illegal status, have much less negotiating power than a full citizen.
What were the serfs and peasants of the Middle Ages? Perhaps they were not slaves, but they most certainly were not free men. How about the “wage slaves” during the early industrial period?
Like slavery, illegal immigration is an issue that involves great wealth. Consider that slavery was the root cause of the Civil War. Then consider the reaction of Congress to the illegal immigration issue. In spite of the fact that the public clearly wants illegal immigration stopped, moneyed interests have stopped real reform in its tracks.
Moreover, like the slavery issue, this problem has dragged on for decades and even gotten worse. The 1986 Immigration Reform bill was not reform. In fact, it turned out to be an outright lie.
Unlike the slavery issue of old, there are three factors that keep the illegal immigration issue from stirring up more animosity.
(1) The problem is national, not regional.
(2) To find laborers willing to do “the work Americans will not do,” the moneyed interests bribing our leaders do their dirty work in the shadows.
(3) Many illegal immigrant advocates naively claim humanitarian concerns, and these issues are not entirely without foundation.
Put together, these three factors leave voters confused about who to blame and what to about it. Nonetheless, as events in Prince William demonstrate, the public is getting fed up and wants action.
There were so many ways to listen to and resolve complaints in this county without creating the havoc and expense that the BOCS chose. I know we have discussed these on anti-BVBL which just goes to show you, yes, people have problems they want resolved, but yes, residents are smart and do have viable ideas that aren’t getting the same attention that hate groups and the politically motivated are getting.
Tom,
I didn’t think the Manhattan Institute study would be that persuasive for you, simply because it’s clear to me that you’ve already made up your mind.
What I still haven’t figured out yet is whether it’s really just illegal immigration that bothers you. Pretty much everything you’ve said could be applied to legal immigrants as well.
More importantly, the issues you raise are the same issues that were raised in the 19th Century and early 20th Century. People didn’t want immigration then, either, especially not immigrants like those dirty Irishmen and all those people from Eastern Europe who dressed funny and spoke a weird language.
So I’ll repeat the question I asked about 24 hours ago that I never got a straight answer to:
Yes or no, do you favor any immigration at all and under what rules ?
Doug — Here is what I said earlier.
“Ours is now a well-populated nation. We do not need new citizens just to populate the landscape or for cheap labor. So I think we should strive to attract well-educated, productive people. I think the goal of our immigration policies should be to encourage and build diplomatic and trade relationships with other nations.”
Let’s turn your question around. Yes or no, do you favor any RESTRICTIONS on immigration at all and under what rules?
The only restrictions on immigration that I can justify are those that prevent people with criminal records or questionable political ties from entering the country.
Since I consider to be free movement of people to be an individual right as important as freedom of speech, I don’t think the state has the right to prevent individuals from exercising their choice over where they want to live.
So, tell me, if we’re going to restrict immigration to “well-educated productive people” who do plan on getting to pick the crops in places like Florida and California ?
Doug – Free movement of people across a national border. To a former military guy, that brings to mind the march of a barbarian horde or a NAZI blitzkrieg.
The rights of every man, woman, and child have restrictions placed upon on them. That is, our natural rights are limited by the rights of other people. The right of the free movement of people too has practical limits. In this case, it encounters the right of the People of the United States to enforce sovereignty over its borders. Without such control, we cannot maintain our nation identity. If we don’t want our nation to be invaded by freely moving people, we have a right not to be so invaded.
Who do I plan on getting to pick crops in places like Florida and California? Now you are using a logical fallacy; you are creating a false dilemma. Since your about me page mentions a couple of economists, I presume you are familiar with the Law of Supply and Demand. If family farmers and farm corporations cannot hire inexpensive illegal immigrants, they will have to pay wages and provide work conditions that American citizens find attractive. Why is that a problem? With 300 million people, we need to import labor? The percentage of our population involved in farming what? Two percent?
Tom,
Border security and immigration are two entirely different issues. Don’t accuse me of wanting to see al Qaeda streaming across the borders when that isn’t even what you’re talking about.
As I am sure you are aware, those economists, including people that Republicans pretend to respect like Milton Friedman, were in favor of much less restrictive immigration laws than the ones in place today.
But to address your broader point:
Do you even understand how labor intensive the farming business in California and Florida actually is ? Do you have any concept of how much more expensive everything from lettuce to strawberries would be if there weren’t migrants from Mexico coming across the border to pick everything ?
Doug, like any law, immigration law is about protecting the rights of Americans. That does includes keeping the likes of al Qaeda from streaming across the borders, crooks, rapists, welfare moochers, and so forth. It also includes otherwise people who would change the character of our nation. That is why, for example, we insist people learn English before they become citizens.
There any number of people, who when they look at what is happening in Western Europe, predict disaster. Perhaps the Europe’s problem is that Europeans may simply not know how to readily assimulate immigrants. However, even the USA has limits. When all people have to do is drive or walk across our border to immigrate, we can get a whole bunch of immigrant. Frankly, I think their are some advantages when we all speak the same language.
We need illegal immigrants to pick strawberries? Hogwash! Look to the theme of your own blog. If we so much need cheap labor to pick strawberries, then why don’t we just enslave Mexico and be done with it?
Historically, the strength of American agriculture has been in its ability to innovate, NOT CHEAP LABOR.
Don’t nations become wealthy by giving their citizens the freedom to innovate and increase their productivity? When people exploit the cheap labor of others, all they do is put off the need to innovate. Look at the South and then the North prior to the Civil War. Why did the North industrialize and the South remain almost strictly agricultural?
Tom,
There is no such thing as a right to “protect the character of our nation”
Comparing the situation in Europe and immigration in the United States doesn’t work for precisely the reason you mention — Europeans have never been able to assimilate immigrants from other cultures. Remember that assimilation is a two-way street. It’s because of assimilation that we have everything from pizza to the ottoman you rest your feet on.
America became wealthy precisely because it provided opportunities for people to come here and make new lives, build businesses, and innovate. If you want to guarantee economic stagnation, then there’s no easier way to do than restrict the flow of immigrants and wait a generation or two.
Doug – Nations have been protecting their national identity by enforcing sovereignty over their borders for a long time. I don’t feel any need to justify it. The only issue is whether we will gather the will to do it once again.
The situation in Europe is not exactly the same as what we face. However, it is close enough. I see little point in assuming an air of superiority. I think it foolish to assume it cannot happen here.
If we are going to allow them to come (and we have that choice or there would be nothing to debate), then I want immigrants to benefit my family, my community, and my country. Illegal immigration occurs unmonitored. As far as I and most other people can tell, illegal immigrants place a costly burden on our communities. So we want illegal immigration stopped.
Instead of arguing for the legalization of illegal immigrants, why don’t you make a case for the legal variety.
If the big complaint is that illegal immigration is such a huge problem because of the welfare state related costs, perhaps we could offer the illegals who don’t presently use and never have used any of the welfare state services the chance to a speedier path to legality if they give up all rights to any welfare state services forever. they would continue to pay medicare, social security, etc, but would never be eligible to collect anything from it.
would that be sufficient for you? because I bet plenty of them would take that deal. Perhaps even enough to bail the rest of us out of our social security mess…
[...] the prospect of a high-school valedictorian who has been in this country since he was three years old facing deporta… bothers you as much as it bothers me, then how about a 13 year-old Boy Scout who faces the prospect [...]
[...] So, tell me, if we’re going to restrict immigration to “well-educated productive people” who do plan on getting to pick the crops in places like Florida and California ? (from here) [...]