SI SU CASA NO ES NUESTRA CASA

SI SU CASA NO ES NUESTRA CASA

The advocates of amnesty for aliens who entered this country illegally make what is called in law an argument on the equities.  The illegals, they argue, have been here a long time, working hard and paying taxes and wanting to become American.  Because the illegals “want to be American,” they argue, we should give them a “path to citizenship.”  There is thus a completely unexamined assumption.  It is an assumption that leaves out a simple fact: there are many here illegally who do not wish to become American, who do not wish to acculturate into our culture.   Advocates seem to hope that this simple fact of such a flawed assumption in their argument will be ignored by the people.

In April, 2013, a talk show was running on Washington D.C.’s conservative blowtorch station WMAL: A man called from Texas.  He had a Hispanic name and a noticeable accent.  He said he had come to the U.S. from Mexico and loves the U.S. and its founding principles.  He said that many of the Mexicans who surround him in Texas make him sick because they come here to the U.S. illegally with no interest in becoming American at all.  They undercut local workers in order to take their jobs and then send the money back to Mexico where they are buying land.  Their goal is to return to Mexico and retire there on the land and in the house there that they have acquired with the money that they have made here illegally.  They disdain this country and all it stands for. Their only goal is to use it so that they can be even more Mexican.  They march in parades here waving the Mexican flag while demanding better treatment and asserting “rights” to get benefits from the Norteamericano governments, state and federal, that they constantly criticize.

Our governmental elites oblige them, giving federal grants of money to the organization La Raza, which on the walls of its offices displays maps of the reconquista, a plan to reconquer all of what is now the United States that was conquered by us as a result of our war with Mexico in 1846 and to include also Texas and evcn parts of Kansas, to retake what the Texicans took from the dictator Santa Ana, the “Napoleon of the West” when his oppression and brutal treatment caused the Americans who moved there to revolt and ultimately, under Sam Houston at San Jacinto, defeat Santa Ana and declare a republic based on our founding principles and incorporating our culture as blended with that of the Spanish speaking there that identified with our founding principles rather than the “top down” (in the words of the Latin-American economist De Soto) system of Mexico itself..  In the “comprehensive immigration reform” bills presently before the Senate there is on that would actually give money to La Raza, “the Race,” to work with illegals, that is, to help the reconquista.  That is how out of touch some in the Washington elites are with those they supposedly represent.

Congress has passed laws to set out the categories of non-Americans who can come here temporarily under visas established pursuant to the directions of Congress.  These include skilled workers, agricultural guest workers, and all sorts of students, who, it is purposed and hoped, will return to the lands from whence they came, having learned about the United States in a favorable light, to impart skills to their own countries that will help to bring those countries into a more developed countries to whom we can relate in a favorable light.  Heretofore Congress has not seen fit to establish a category of workers, low in skill, of whom it would be wished that they come here, harm Amercian workers by displacing them and American businesses that believe in the rule of law and refuse to hire illegal aliens. 

Clearly Mexicans who come here illegally and work illegally and send money back home to acquire a house and land there to which the aspire to retire and promote Mexican culture which they view as superior to our Norteamericano culture are far outside any purpose which a representative Congress should be casting into law.  While they are here they are not only not assimilating into our society, they are harming Americans and America.  Their intent to return after being here illegally to the country from which they came and benefit it does not present a question of innocent children being harmed by the illegal actions of their parents.

Why do we not do something about these hostile elements and address what could we do about the problem?  What can a concerned citizenry in our Republic advocate that would, if voiced, stop this harmful behavior?  As we have pointed out before the great failure of most of our enforcement efforts to do something about the problem of illegal immigration stems from the simple fact that we have ignored the great tradition of our legal history that the purpose of a rule of law is to give practical remedies within the legal process to those who are actually harmed so that they may be compensated for the wrongs done them.  Instead all our executive efforts in seeking to carry out the expressed will of Congress to control immigration within legal bounds and procedures have been in the hands of federal bureaucrats who now, particularly under the present executive regime, have pointedly at the behest of the man presently occupying the Oval Office, made it clear that they do not want the laws passed by Congress effectively carried out and will, by direction from the top, go out of their way not to enforce them.

Quite clearly the transfer of funds from this country to Mexico, or, for that matter, any other country, is a transaction in foreign commerce.  Thus every such transfer, under the Constitution, is within the power of Congress to regulate.  On the other hand, the operation of businesses that effect such transfers requires state and  local business licensing.  Some states have already sought by law to stop financial institutions from accepting deposits and transferring funds for those who are not legally here.  As we have pointed out, rather than leaving such a remedy exclusively in the hands of a bureaucracy, as at present reflects a political pressure to seek to have such illegals become voters, State legislatures, using their power to create jurisdiction in courts, could make such entities engaging in transferring funds from illegals out of the country, liable civilly to those who are harmed by the illegals making the transfers.   It would be possible as a matter of state fair trade laws to make such entities liable as accessories to the workers displaced by the illegal workers and the honest businesses that do not employ illegals and are economically harmed as a result.  Strong injunctive relief could be provided enabling those harmed when they sue for treble damages to stop the transfers and be entitled to funds equal to those funds that were sent in violation of law.