DACA, Dreamers, and Reality

When laws are broken, people often get hurt.  Often those people are innocent victims.  That does not mean that laws should not be enforced.

With that thought in mind let’s turn to DACA and the Dreamers. 

We have immigration laws in this country that provide very generous immigration policies.  We also have people who enter the country illegally in an effort, for whatever reason, to circumvent those laws.  They are illegal aliens.  Sometimes they bring their children with them – they too are illegally in this country.  One can invoke great feelings of sympathy by describing a very young child who was simply carted here illegally by parents who chose to break the law (for whatever reason, noble or not) and most everyone would say they abhor the idea of that child being thrown out of the country.  But, if I ask whether you want to ignore our laws and our Constitution, you might have a different response; indeed, I would hope that the idea of only following the Constitution, our laws, and our system of government when it feels good would be abhorrent to everyone.

And, that is the first problem with the current DACA situation.  When Congress, the body responsible for enacting laws about immigration, failed to reach a solution to address the Dreamers, the then president Obama, tired of waiting, and asserting feelings of compassion, violated the separation of powers and created DACA by executive fiat.  Not only is that itself wrong, it also sets a bad precedent:  do we really want a president to be able to circumvent our separation of powers when he or she feels strongly about something?  The possibilities of that are truly frightening and suggest a totalitarianism rather than a democracy.

So, let’s accept that Trump was correct in rescinding that order and in placing the answer to the dreamers and the immigration questions they pose in the rightful hands of Congress.  It would seem that all law-abiding citizens should be able to agree on that.  But, sadly, they cannot.  Many of the populace would rather have emotion rule the day.

And, so, we have attorneys general of several states filing suit to retain this program that was created in violation of our Constitution.  These are the folks who should be leading the way in upholding our laws, not arguing to enforce programs that are emotionally pleasing to us regardless of whether their creation violated the basic premises of our Constitution and our democracy.

The disagreement should not be about whether the 2012 DACA order should have been rescinded.  Rather, the disagreement should be focused on how Congress should deal with the fact that there are individuals illegally in this country who were brought here as minors.  On the part of most I suspect there is an urge toward compassion, which is good.  But along with that must come an examination of the consequences, both good and bad, of that compassion.  In weighing those factors, one must first have a basic grasp of the actual facts about DACA and the Dreamers, because proponents of various views will put forth only their interpretations of those facts.

First, let’s consider who the Dreamers are.  They had to be under 31 in 2012 and had to have come to America when they were 15 or younger.  Most of the DACA “children” are in their mid-20s today.  They had to have lived in this country since 2007 (10 years as of today, 5 years when DACA was signed in 2012).  Many have jobs.  They are eligible for Social Security, Medicare, and Earned Income Credit on their taxes, but are not eligible for many other welfare benefits.  Many of the Dreamers hold jobs, and there is an argument being put forward that it would be detrimental to lose them from our work force. 

I will begin with considering that jobs argument.  Are there no eligible American citizens that can fill those jobs? Last time I looked there were still many unemployed Americans looking for work.  I read an article this morning that included a statement by an employer that he had 3 construction jobs filled by dreamers and was concerned he would not find replacements.  Huh?  There are not 3 young people here legally who would be willing to take those jobs?  Is it that he won’t find replacements, or that he won’t find replacements who are as subservient as the DACA employees or perhaps who will demand higher wages or benefits?  Do the people who are asserting that only Dreamers can do the jobs really have that low an opinion of our own young adults?  That, alone, deserves a far deeper discussion, beyond what is being addressed here.

But, I am ready to assume that most – nearly all – the Dreamers are good people who are stuck in a horrible situation through no fault of their own.  (I remind people that life is not fair and we cannot fix everything for everyone).  But, if all it meant was giving citizenship to these young adults who were willing to apply and to go through the formal process, I might be for that.  But again, we must look at reality and reality tells us that things would not end there.

So, here are some of the problem consequences with granting any kind of legal status to the Dreamers.  First, if we revoke the rescission of Obama’s DACA order and allow that order to remain in place, we are setting a dangerous precedent that allows a future president to override Congress, our laws, and our Constitution. 

Second, if Congress reinstates DACA in a legal manner, we are essentially sending the message that if you come here illegally eventually America’s compassion will get the better of itself and its laws and you will be granted some means of becoming a legal resident of the country.  This is even if the DACA program itself is limited only to those currently within the country.  One only has to consider the rise in illegal immigration following the grant of amnesty during President Reagan’s term in office.  What is to prevent illegal immigration of new families coming with the belief that if they wait long enough they will be given some sort of legal status.  Not only does this fly in the face of any legal immigration policy, it is also a slap in the face to those families that choose to pursue a legal path to immigration and citizenship.

We also have family unification programs that allow those immigrants here legally to bring in their families.  So the Dreamers would likely have an opportunity to be joined by family members who otherwise would have had to follow a normal immigration procedure.  So, along with granting legal status to 800,000 young adults under DACA we could also be granting legal status to a significantly larger number as they reunify their families.

I can’t imagine being brought to a country by my parents only to be told I am illegally there and hence must deport.  It is a horrible situation.  On the other hand, I also cannot imagine being over 18, knowing I am illegally present, and not considering alternatives beyond hoping that I eventually be given some sort of legal status. 

This is not an easy problem and we should not provide easy solutions; nor should our solutions be based solely on emotion.  Life is hard.  Laws exist.  When people break the laws, even with the best motive, people are hurt.  Parents who brought their children illegally to America may have believed they were helping their children.  They were not.  They were breaking the laws and their children are now the victims of their illegal behavior. 

These children are now mostly young adults.  Like all young adults, they need to find their path forward, and for many of the Dreamers, just as for many other young adults, that path may not be an easy one.  But that fact alone does not mean that we should grant them legal status.   Congress must seriously consider the many possible consequences of their actions on behalf of the Dreamers, focusing not only on their compassion for these young adults, but also on their compassion for the legal citizens and immigrants of this country and for this country’s laws.