Opponents of illegal immigrants are angry that some of President Trumpâ€™s advisers are said to be urging him to make a political deal about the estimated 800,000 young people who have been living in the country illegally but who have been given temporary sanctuary under the Obama administrationâ€™s â€śdeferred action for childhood arrivalsâ€ť program.
Supporters of illegal immigrants are angry that the president might use the young people to extort Congress for money to build the wall he wants to erect along the Mexican border.
Meanwhile 10 states are suing the Trump administration for continuing the sanctuary program, alleging that it violates federal immigration law and is unconstitutional.
The states that are suing may be right on the law as it stands but, if so, it should be changed, since it is too cruel to imagine deporting all these young people, most of whom are already effectively Americans and have no connection to their native countries, from which their parents brought them when they were very young. Since these young people very much want to be Americans, are being educated in the countryâ€™s schools, and are entering adulthood ready to contribute to the country and pay taxes, there is no need to deport them.
While some of them display an annoying arrogance about their circumstances, claiming that they have a â€śrightâ€ť to stay here and calling those who disagree with them â€śextremists,â€ť there would be little justice in deporting them, since they are not responsible for the lawbreaking that brought them here and since the federal government itself shares responsibility for their illegal presence. That is, the federal government knew about many of them and their parents from the moment of their illegal entry or soon after it and failed to enforce the law against them.
So why should anyone care much if the president wants to take them hostages for his wall? The country desperately needs a political compromise on its immigration problem, and the outlines of a compromise long have been clear - firm control of the border, often promised but never delivered, in exchange for a path to citizenship for illegals who can demonstrate their desirability as citizens.
Mexico wonâ€™t pay for the wall, as the president wants. But it would be paid for by the contributions to the country of the young people whose presence in the country is legitimized by a political deal for the wall and border control. So their friends in Congress should pursue such a deal.
* * *
Fascism on the left: The countryâ€™s elites were outraged the other day when a few dozen Nazi and Ku Klux Klan sympathizers stomped through Charlottesville, Virginia, supposedly to protest removal of a statue of Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee.
But the same elites were not bothered at all when, a few days later, 30,000 or so people, many identifying themselves as socialists, marched to prevent a couple dozen people from holding a rally on the Boston Common in support of free speech.
The free speech people in Boston had explicitly rejected any connection to Nazism and Ku-Kluxery, but no matter. The leftists threatened violence anyway and caused the police to block access to the rally. Then the leftists created so much noise that the free speech people could not be heard.
Nor were the same elites bothered a week ago when â€śanti-fascistsâ€ť attacked peaceful conservatives trying to hold a rally in Berkeley, California.
Since obstructing free speech has become the practice of the fascist left throughout the country, itâ€™s getting hard to tell the difference between socialism and National Socialism.
Chris Powell is managing editor of the Journal Inquirer in Manchester.