Immigration as One of the Hottest Debate Issues - Essay Example

Introduction Immigration is fast becoming one of the hottest debate issues not only in the law making chambers but also in the streets. Every American citizen is currently concerned with the issue of immigration as the number of immigrants who enter the United States each year using illegal means increases. There are conservatives who are strictly anti-immigration. These conservatives are of the opinion that these immigrants come in to steal American jobs and further overburden the already stretched American healthcare system. There are, however, two sides to this coin as far as public opinion is concerned. Contrary to the hardline opinion of the conservatives, we have the liberals who envision America as the land of opportunity, not just for American citizens but all of mankind. According to these liberals, America is a proverbial utopia of opportunity where virtually anyone can make it in life as long as they are willing to work hard for it (Daniels, p.71). Clearly, the topic of immigration is a divisive one. Over the past decade, immigration has morphed from a legislative topic to one of the mainstream issues being discussed on the streets by the local people. Irrespective of political affiliations and social standing, every American citizen seems to fall victim to this rather polarizing issue. It is as a result of this that there is need to formulate and put in place legislative work that is aimed at streamlining the issue of immigration (McLaughlin, p13-25). Not only keeping in mind that the interests of American citizens come first but also that the immigrants may play an instrumental role in building the economy of the united states. This paper focuses on immigration laws in the state of Virginia vis a vis the interest of the Americans living in Virginia but also the immigrants who are protected by international laws set forth by the United Nations. Current immigration law in Virginia As in accordance with the 287(g) immigration and customs enforcement program famously known as ICE, law enforcement agencies in the state of Virginia liaise with each other. This liaison can be viewed in the form of a network of law enforcement agencies where these agencies share relevant information with each other pertaining the issue of immigration. This program gives the state police jurisdiction that was previously a reserve of the federal immigration agencies. This jurisdiction includes, but is not limited to, checking the immigration status of anyone who is stopped by the state police (Farnam, p23-30). A closer examination of this piece of legislation is necessary in order to establish its validity vis a vis the Constitution and the declaration of independence. This law clearly stipulated that the state police can check the immigration status of anyone they stop for the whatsoever reason they stop the person in question. This means that an individual does not need to be under arrest for their immigration status to be vetted by the state police (Virginia Laws for the Suppression of Illegal Immigration). This also means that the state police can indiscriminately check the immigration status of anyone who crosses their path without explaining to the person in question the exact necessity of this procedure. Under the very same program also falls the federal program known as secure communities. This program dictates that every arrest made by the state police in the state of Virginia has to, in due process, be fingerprinted. After the fingerprints are taken, they have to be run through a database owned by the federal government so that the immigration status and criminal record of the arrestee can be scrutinized and vetted (Virginia). The law on the federal police checking the immigration status of citizens randomly can be traced back to the state of Arizona. The law, however, received a major setback in the state of Virginia when federal judge Susan Bolton deemed the law as being unconstitutional. According to the federal judge, the law went too far and was, in essence, a violation of the rights of American citizens. Despite the negative opinion voiced towards the law by federal judge Susann Bolton, the law in question seemingly received a major enforcement when attorney general Ken Cuccinelli offered his legal opinion to the effect that it was indeed necessary and within the law for state police to check the immigration status of anyone they stopped for whatsoever reason. The attorney general’s perception of the matter came from his interpretation of the state law regarding the issue. He argued that immigration had by all means become a major issue not only in the state of Virginia but all over the United States. Thus, it was necessary that the police check the immigration status of anyone they stopped irrespective of whether or not the individual in question had been arrested (Cohen, p.140). In order to come full circle in the analysis of this particular law, it is very important to incorporate public perception and sentiments on the matter. A staggering majority of the Virginian citizenry seems to fall firmly on this law (Johnson, p.126). The citizens of the state of Virginia have been among the most vocal critics of the Obama government, sighting the failure of the government to protect its citizens from the seemingly negative influence of illegal immigrants. This criticism is particularly fuelled by the fact that the Obama government has allocated quite a huge percentage of its budget to immigration and ensuring that American borders are as non-porous as possible. Proposed changes to the law. With the issue of immigration being more and more intense, it is necessary that the Virginian citizenry also aids in curbing the vice. There is a growing necessity for the local citizens also to take part and help the law enforcement agencies in fighting immigration and protecting American citizens from the negative influence of illegal immigrants. Thus, community policing should also aid in fighting immigration. It is a known fact that local communities in the state of Virginia usually form small entities to ensure security in a given community (Gerdes, p30). These small community-based entities are known as neighborhood watches. Clearly, it is easier for a neighborhood watch team to identify an illegal immigrant since they are closer to the community. Thus, the proposal is that the neighborhood watch teams should liaise with the state police in checking the immigration status of people in the local community, especially new members of the community in question. The exact wording of the law shall be as follows: the state police shall reserve the right to check the immigration status of everybody they stop for a whatsoever reason. Every community consisting of thirty houses shall form a community watch team consisting of able-bodied members of the community. These community watch teams shall work very closely with the state police on the issue of immigration. The community watch team shall strictly vet any new arrivals in the community and any discrepancies found in the vetting process shall promptly be reported to the state police for further investigation and analysis. It should be clear that the community watch teams are not in any way a law enforcement agency but rather social entities tasked with ensuring cohesion in the local community. As a result, the community watch teams are barred from acting independently without consultation with the state police. Any findings of the community watch teams are to be reported to the state police for further action. The community watch teams, however, reserve the right to make citizen’s arrest especially when the immigration status of a new member of the community is clearly questionable. Once the arrest is made, the community watch team is barred from taking any punitive measures against the arrestee. The community watch team only reserves the right to go as far as making the arrest and handing over the arrested individual for further scrutiny of their immigration status. The community watches team can also report a suspected illegal immigrant to the local police without necessarily vetting the immigration status of the individual in question. It is then the responsibility of the local and state police to take up investigations on concerns raised by the community watch teams (Johnson, p16-25). In view of current public perception on the issue of immigration in the state of Virginia, enactment of this law will not be as challenging as expected. The majority of the Virginian citizenry is already firmly against illegal immigration. It is a safe assumption that the citizenry will not shy away from an opportunity to aid law enforcement agencies in fighting the vice that they seem to be firmly against. Implementation of the law will begin with the formation of the community watch teams that are recognized by law. The question thus arises as to the exact composition of these community watch teams. Recruitment into the community watch team shall be on a voluntary basis. Each community watch team shall consist of ten members who will have jurisdiction over a total of thirty houses in their local vicinity. After formation, the members of the community watch team will undergo training by the state police not only on the logistics of illegal immigration but also on the necessary steps to take one an illegal immigrant has been affirmatively identified. The community watch team hall then takes an oath of service and sign the necessary documentation acknowledging their respective roles and responsibilities towards the state and the local community (Labor Laws of Virginia). This new legislation is advantageous not just from a logistical point of view but also from a financial point of view. This stems from the fact that members of the community watch teams will be operating on a voluntary basis (Proper, p.88). Thus, it will cost the state of Virginia very little as far as the maintenance and upkeep of these groups is concerned. There is, however, a need to fund the training and equipping of the community watch team with the necessary devices to carry out their community monitoring program. A good example is the forms that each new member of the community will be required to fill clearly stipulating their relevant details such as their names, date and place of birth, social security number and employment record. Funds will also need to be set aside for the training of the community watch teams by the state police as to the exact mechanics of immigration laws and policies. The state of Virginia will, therefore, have to allocate a small percentage of its annual budget to that effect. This will, however, be a tiny percentage of the annual budget of the state of Arizona. Funds will also need to be created for the occasional compensation of the community watch teams for a job well done. This is just an added incentive since initial membership into the community watch team is strictly on a voluntary basis. This policy change is a very good idea in the fight against illegal immigration. Primarily, the task of fighting illegal immigration cannot be left exclusively to the state police and local law enforcement agencies. This is because these law enforcement agencies may lack crucial information that is available on a community level. Members of the community may also shy away from sharing information on immigration with law enforcement agencies especially if the community in question consists of minorities. This new law, however, brings to place a new body that is closer to the community. From a psychological point of view, members of a given community might feel more comfortable sharing information among themselves that with law enforcement officers especially been the instance of minority groups. It can, therefore, be argued that it will be easier for the community watch teams to get information on illegal immigration than it is for the state police and other law enforcement agencies. Thus, the success of the entire program banks on surgical coordination between the community watch teams and the state police, and the free flow of information between these two entities on any matter pertaining to illegal immigration in the state of Virginia. Another factor that tends to allude to the success of this program and, in essence, a positive reception of the law is the number of people who are against illegal immigration in the state of Virginia. Statistical reports reveal that a staggering 90% of the Virginian citizenry are anti-illegal immigration to the very core (Virginia, p.86). This means that a majority of the Virginian citizenry would actively aid local law enforcement agencies in fighting illegal immigration. It also means that a liaison between the local law enforcement agencies and the citizens is likely to be fruitful in fighting illegal immigration in the state of Virginia. If this proposal were to go before the general assembly in its current form, it would most pass. This can be inferred from the political temperature in the state of Virginia and the sentiments of the attorney general concerning the issue of illegal immigration. The legislature is currently made up of people who are vastly anti-immigration. Members of the legislature have often openly voiced their distaste for illegal immigration and the toll that the vice is currently taking on American infrastructures such as the healthcare system and the education system. It is a safe assertion that these congress members would strongly support this new anti-immigration law since it is aimed at smoking out illegal immigrants hiding in plain sight in American communities (Immigration Laws). This proposal would most definitely make it to the Governor’s desk who would by all means sign it. The signing of the governor is influenced by a number of factors primarily the political backlash from the constituents if the governor does not ascend to this law. Irrespective of the personal views of the governor, the political atmosphere and public opinion on the matter in the state of Virginia would force the governor to sign this new law. Conclusion With the current rise in cases of illegal immigration, it is necessary to incorporate the local community into the fight against illegal immigration. The fact is that illegal immigrants often hide in plain sight oblivious to the law enforcement agencies. It would be easier for community-based entities to identify these illegal immigrants than it is for law enforcement agencies. Works Cited Anderson, Stuart. Immigration. Santa Barbara, Calif.: Greenwood, 2010. Print. Cohen, Felix S. Exclusionary Immigration Laws, 2010. Print. Daniels, Roger. Coming to America: A History of Immigration and Ethnicity in American Life. New York, NY: HarperCollins, 2010. Print. Farnam, Julie. US Immigration Laws under the Threat of Terrorism. New York: Algora Pub., 2005. Print. Gerdes, Louise I. Immigration. San Diego, Calif.: Greenhaven, 2005. Print. Immigration Laws. Washington: Govt. Print. Off., 2008. Print. Johnson, Kevin R. Opening the Floodgates: Why America Needs to Rethink Its Borders and Immigration Laws. New York: New York UP, 2007. Print. Labor Laws of Virginia. Charlottesville, Va.: Michie, 2006. Print. McLaughlin, Virginia, and Inc Foundation. Immigration Reconsidered: History, Sociology, and Politics. New York: Oxford UP, 2000. Print. Proper, Emberson Edward. Colonial Immigration Laws a Study of the Regulation of Immigration by the English Colonies in America. New York: Columbia UP, 2000. Print. Virginia. Richmond: D. Bottom, Superintendent of Public Print., 2008. Print. Virginia Laws for the Suppression of Illegal Immigration. Richmond: D. Bottom, Superintendent Public Printing, 2007. Print. Read More