Arizona's Immigration Law

I haven't posted anything about it until now because illegal immigration is not a hot-button issue of mine. I favor greatly-expanded legal immigration from Mexico and other Latin American countries, and support an amnesty program that would allow current illegal residents to obtain citizenship. In general, I think the vast majority of illegal immigrants benefit the U.S. and our economy. But having said all that, I don't have a major problem with the Arizona law -- if I understand it correctly.

Border states such as Arizona do have serious problems caused by illegal immigration. The federal government has failed to control the border, and the states have to act on their own. Although I am inherently suspicious of any increase in police powers, it appears that the Arizona law merely allows/requires police to enforce existing immigration law, although certain specific provisions might not stand up under court scrutiny. I see nothing to warrant the hysterical, borderline crazy overreaction by the usual suspects. Byron York, writing in the Washington Examiner, does a good job debunking some of the apparently misinformed criticism.

Deport Him & Anyone With a Similar Case

The NY Times has an article up about the case of Youssef Samir Megahed, an immigrant from Egypt who has been living in the U.S. for eleven years. The Times article bemoans the fact that he is now facing deportation charges in immigration court. As usual, the Times is far more worried about the supposed rights of aliens than protecting the U.S.

Read this article for the details, but essentially Megahed was caught with another man, Ahmed Mohamed, travelling in a car with pipe bombs and other terrorism-related material. Mohamed has since pled guilty to "providing material support to terrorists." Megahed claimed he didn't know anything about it and was just traveling with Mohamed. A court found him not guilty. 

Despite the fact that he was cleared of criminal charges, the U.S. is doing exactly the right thing in attempting to deport him. Do we really need more Muslim immigrants with ties to terrorists in the U.S.? He's not a U.S. citizen, and his presence in the U.S. is a privilege not a right. Even if he is completely innocent, as a resident alien he should have been much more careful about who he associated with. There is no reason whatsoever for the U.S. to take any chances with him. Unlike what the New York Times usually advocates, the U.S. government should err on the side of protecting the country when dealing with aliens. Kick him out, and the sooner the better.

Quick Citizenship for Military Service

The New York Times reports that the military, beginning with the army, will begin recruiting non-citizens who are in the U.S. on temporary visas. In return for joining, the immigrants will be put on an accelerated path to citizenship, able to become citizens in "as little as six months." In return, the new citizens would be required to serve for a certain number of years, depending on specialty.

I have mixed feelings about this program. On the one hand, I understand why the military is doing it, and the value of obtaining native language specialists in particular. And I am strongly in favor of granting citizenship to any immigrant who honorably serves in the military for a significant period of time. But offering it to people who are only in the country on temporary visas seems to be going a bit far. We will in effect be buying their services with citizenship. They won't necessarily be joining out of any desire to serve the country, and their military service might be seen as a burden rather than a commitment -- something they will have to get through in order to retain their new citizenship. According to the Times, failing to complete the service requirement could result in the revocation of citizen status. What happens if they need to be discharged for some reason? Will we make them citizens and then take citizenship away? Wouldn't it be better to grant them citizenship after they successfully complete their term of service?