Transcedental Guilt- Nir
The new Alabama law requiring school officials to determine by birth certificates or sworn affidavits the legal status of incoming students is unfair and a violation of the American right for a basic education. The fact that a law like this can be upheld in court is a scary notion and is a strong example of the prevalence of racism in America today. As the article states, this law not only contradicts the federal law formed in Plyler vs. Doe, but it defies the basic human rights established in the Civil Rights Movement. The children hurt by these new laws are not responsible for their illegal status and the law only serves to impede their chance at professional and economic success. Moreover, the lack of education can only lead to less economic production from the immigrants, which only hurts the general American public.
That being said, it does bring up the question up of where do we draw the line of opportunity when it comes to undocumented children. If these children are truly innocent, and we are looking to help the American public, then why not pass the Dream Act? The dream act would only help improve the economy and strengthen our military forces. Despite these benefits, the Dream Act did not pass in congress, which sends a strong message about the consequences of illegal immigration and the American identity.
Are those children truly innocent? Well technically of course as they had no choice in determining their path as young children. That being said, one must consider that guilt is often transcendental. For example, if a father commits a crime and is sent to jail, and is therefore unable to provide for his child, then the child pays the consequences of his father’s action. This child will most likely grow to have fewer opportunities and have more financial and emotional troubles. Isn’t this child innocent? If so, is it the government’s responsibility to provide all the money the father doesn’t? It is practically impossible to provide for all those who have opportunities takes away from them and is in fact the nature of capitalism and American law. It is in this sense that the father’s guilt is transcended to the child, which suffers punishment from the father’s crimes.
The same idea can also apply to the undocumented children. Although they are innocent technically, the parent’s criminal consequences are transcended onto them. So is it fair to deny these children all rights because of their parents’ actions?
It is important to keep in mind that although the government can’t completely refund the opportunities taken away from parent’s actions, it does offer certain programs to assist the children and their families (ex. FAFSA, TAP, Social Security, Medicaid etc.). Similarly, undocumented children should be given certain opportunities/programs. The most basic of these opportunities should be the right for basic schooling. In fact, I believe access to knowledge is a basic human right. It is for this reason that I believe the new Alabama law is a moral violation.
How severe is the crime of illegal immigration that the children should be stripped of their human right for knowledge?
Here is the article- Sorry- http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/10/04/should-alabama-schools-help-catch-illegal-immigrants/an-anti-immigrant-climate
I like the analogy that you drew. It is true that in both instances, the child has no choice but to live with the consequences of events beyond their control – yet the government provides assistance in one circumstance, and doesn’t in the other. These undocumented children are already in a “disabled status.” It is unfortunate that they now might have to pass up basic education for fear of deportation.
Yes, I think Nir made a great analogy as well. It shows that every action one does does not just affect you, but other people around you as well. In both cases, because the children are under the care of the parents, the children are tied to their parents’ actions. However, this still does not justify punishing children for the parents’ actions. Possibly, preventing the education of the undocumented immigrant children is being viewed as further punishment for the parents, who just wanted their children to succeed in America. By preventing the children from succeeding, the parents are not able to fulfill their purpose of coming here illegally. This would be a very devious and immoral punishment, as the children did not do anything wrong, but it could explain why these otherwise innocent children are being barred from education.
Also, having a population of people without any education is harmful for us as a society. How can we complain about falling behind other countries in education and then excluding a large number of students from education? This creates an underclass of criminalized individuals who have few options in life other than being exploited. There are always those who benefit from that. You don’t hear them being called “illegal employers”, however.
The government needs to accept the fact that “illegal” immigrants are not going back to where they came from, no matter how hostile and unwelcoming the government tries to be. Once they understand this, they’ll realize that their hostility is only hurting themselves and our country as a whole.
I think the school has a responsibility to do what state law dictates. Furthermore, knowing about the children you will be schooling is a good idea. This article simply reaffirms the point that legalization should be made much easier.