Illegal immigration isn’t just a political talking point—it’s a crisis that impacts public safety, taxpayer dollars, and trust in the rule of law. While some dismiss enforcement as cruel, the reality is far more urgent: sanctuary policies shield violent offenders, open-border policies incentivize lawlessness, and American communities pay the price. It’s time to confront the chaos with real solutions that protect our nation and uphold fairness for those who follow the rules.
The following OpEd ran in the 31 December 2024 edition of the Moscow-Pullman Daily News.
Illegal immigration is one of the most divisive issues in America. Open-border advocates undermine public safety and the rule of law, while critics are unfairly labeled as xenophobic for supporting enforcement. A balanced approach that emphasizes fairness, accountability, and community safety is essential. It’s time to cut through the rhetoric and focus on practical solutions.
Legal Immigration vs. Illegal Immigration
Conflating legal and illegal immigration is a persistent falsehood. They are not the same. Congress allows around 850,000 legal immigrants annually to meet family, labor, and humanitarian needs, following a clear vetting process. In contrast, millions paroled or given “temporary” protections under Biden’s policies fall outside congressional mandate. Until the law changes, it must be enforced.
Illegal immigration circumvents this framework and burdens public resources, placing a significant strain on American taxpayers. While highly educated legal immigrants often contribute greatly, many illegal immigrants lack skills, English proficiency, or diplomas, becoming a fiscal burden. Nearly 60% of families led by illegal immigrants rely on welfare, costing taxpayers more over their lifetimes than they contribute.
Targeted Enforcement, not “Mass Deportation”
The term “mass deportation” is political theater, not policy. What’s proposed is targeted enforcement—removing criminals, repeat offenders, and those who ignore deportation orders. This focuses resources on public safety, not deporting millions. Enforcement restores faith in the law through measured, practical action.
Opponents distort enforcement as heartless by pushing the “mass deportation” narrative. This misleads the public and obscures the real goal: protecting communities based on facts and priorities, not fearmongering.
The Sanctuary City Dilemma; Ending Catch-and-Release at the Border
Sanctuary cities obstruct immigration enforcement by refusing to cooperate with ICE, prioritizing politics over public safety. These policies release criminal offenders instead of transferring them to federal custody, shielding criminals rather than communities.
Texas’s proposal to provide land for detention facilities offers a practical alternative—swiftly processing and deporting illegal entrants while maintaining humane standards. This discourages repeat violations and eases strain on the system. Critics decry these facilities as inhumane echoes of detention camps, but this distorts the issue. Properly run facilities would balance security and compassion, addressing border violations directly and effectively.
The federal government has failed to be decisive. Withholding law enforcement grants from non-compliant jurisdictions is only a start. The catch-and-release policy is a glaring failure, leading to further violence and incentivizing illegal crossings. Politicians who release criminal illegal immigrants must be held personally and legally liable.
Two examples: Jose Ibarra, an illegal immigrant from Venezuela, entered the U.S. unlawfully and was paroled due to detention capacity issues. Despite multiple arrests in New York and Georgia for endangering a child, shoplifting, and other crimes, he was repeatedly released without ICE intervention. In February 2024, he brutally murdered 22-year-old nursing student Laken Riley while she was jogging on the University of Georgia campus.
Sebastian Zapeta-Calil, an illegal alien from Guatemala, was deported under an expedited removal order in 2018. Under Biden’s open-border policy, he returned to the U.S. and is now accused of murdering a woman in a New York City subway by setting her on fire.
These preventable tragedies (and many, many more) highlight the dire consequences of prioritizing ideology over public safety. Holding public officials personally liable for preventable crimes would send a clear message: public safety must come first.
National Security Risks of a Broken System
A porous border creates serious national security risks. The failure to properly vet illegal entrants leaves our nation vulnerable. Strengthening visa processes and requiring applications through embassies abroad can address these threats, while ensuring legal entry through regulated ports enhances security and fairness.
The violent Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua (TdA), known for their distinctive tattoos, exemplifies this failure. Despite their clear identification as members of a dangerous criminal organization, U.S. border guards are prohibited from rejecting them outright. This policy needlessly endangers public safety. A system unwilling to stop known threats undermines its own security.
Countries that refuse to accept deportees, especially criminals, worsen the problem. Diplomatic measures like visa bans and foreign aid restrictions can pressure these nations to comply and stop offloading their issues onto the U.S.
A Path Forward
Enforcing immigration laws isn’t about fear or exclusion – it’s about building a system that reflects both the rule of law and the spirit of compassion that define our nation. Reform must drive home the principles of integrity, security, and the protection of upright citizens while holding violators accountable. If we reprioritize our values in the face of clear evidence of our failures, we can create order out of the chaos, and make way for those who commit to legally entering this country and contributing toward the great American spirit that draws them here in the first place.