During Obama’s administration, he made an executive order that expanded the current DACA program by increasing the length of work permits for eligible children of undocumented immigrants from 2 to 3 years. He also created the DAPA program, which allowed as many as five million unauthorized immigrants who were the parents of citizens or of lawful permanent residents to obtain work permits and avoid deportation. As discussed in class this executive order received a mix of supporters and opposition in the case of Texas vs. U.S. 26 states opposed the Executive Order and 15 states (including NY) and D.C., plus 73 mayors and 30 heads of local law enforcement supported it.

In class, we mentioned the reasons why this executive order received support, however the most important reason to me is that this law protects illegal immigrants from danger (persecution, war, or oppressive regimes). Many people don’t have the luxury of waiting in line when they are in immediate danger and so they flee the country and enter the United States illegally. In most cases, these immigrants didn’t put themselves into these situations, but rather they were born into these disadvantaged circumstances. However, at the end of the day they are still breaking laws that need to be followed. I believe this can be solved by rectifying our immigration policy, specifically, by providing those who claim they are in danger an expedited process to enter the United States. This will only be a temporary permission to stay in the U.S. (perhaps 3 months) and if they want to remain in the U.S. longer, they must provide sufficient proof that they were in immediate danger and complete other required forms within the first month of being in the U.S. I believe this will help people avoid danger and now that there is a more practical way for people to enter the U.S. legally when in harm’s way, it will also deter them from entering the U.S. illegally. Additionally, I believe there would be no other valid reason to illegally immigrate to the U.S. and so there would be no question or doubt as to whether it is right to not provide undocumented immigrants with benefits such as healthcare or schooling and to deport them. Furthermore, to discourage people from abusing this special exception to reside in the U.S., if proper proof of immediate danger isn’t provided then the person may not be able to ever live in the U.S. again. In order to implement this, stricter border control must be in place to really reduce illegal immigration.

On the other hand, we also discussed the reasons why many oppose this executive order, but there are two arguments that I found most prevalent. The first one being that it is not fair that these people come illegally to the country, meanwhile others are doing their due diligence by waiting in line and paying to enter our country legally. As Professor Gitter said, if she was in these people’s situation she would be one of those people waiting in line and following the right procedures to come into America. I can see myself doing the same and so I sympathize with those waiting in line. However, with my proposed plan explained in the last paragraph, I believe illegal immigration can be drastically reduced and those that still continue to illegally immigrate should be deported. The second major reason why people oppose this executive order is that immigrants are benefiting more off of our system than contributing to it (during class it was quickly looked up that though they are a big part of the American economy, the net economic effect of undocumented people is negative). I believe Chynelle’s suggestion of creating a Tax ID would be a great solution to this concern. Most people are against illegal immigration because they believe immigrants are just reaping the benefits of taxpayers’ dollars without contributing anything to the system. However, this argument can be invalidated by making these undocumented immigrants contribute their own share of their income to taxes.

I’d also like to bring up Chynelle’s comment on our contradictory actions as a country. America is saving these immigrants from terrible conditions, but at the same time we are extorting them for cheap labor and grunt work that Americans refuse to do. The only counterargument I can come up for this situation is that it’s better than nothing; at least these immigrants are safe and have some sort of way to make a living, regardless of the type of work it is and how much money they get paid for it. Ultimately, I agree with Chynelle, despite this counterargument I still don’t think that our ‘righteous acts’ of accepting immigrants around the world justifies our unethical actions of taking advantage of their dire circumstances.