« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Selective amnesia, Common Law require non-voting rights amnesty now

Common Law principles of adverse possession, waiver and laches as applied to illegal immigrants would serve the interests of justice

Common Law principles of adverse possession, waiver and laches as applied to illegal immigrants would serve the interests of justice

Conservatives must do justice for long-term residents of the United States, unconnected to the issue of border security. Either it is morally right to treat otherwise letter-of-the-law-abiding immigrants that crossed our non-serious Southern border without official permission long ago, like criminals, or it is morally wrong. Yes, the Rule of Law is paramount, even when disconnected with moral hazard “magnets”, but America’s rule of law includes concepts developed in the Common (case-by-case) Law of England and the United States that temper unjust applications of statutes on the books or even valid warranty fee simple deeds to property and written contracts.

Under the doctrine of “adverse possession”, one can lose the title to one’s real property if he allows (even unknowingly through neglect) another to continuously possess it for ten consecutive years. One can be deemed to have waived provisions of a written contract due to regular and repeated conduct inconsistent with those provisions.

We, as a people, as reflected by the actions of our elected representatives in the legislative and executive branches of government, have over many decades had a de facto open southern border policy. The only real border security we have seriously pursued have been named Ike and a few fences. No president since Reagan has taken border enforcement seriously, and their inaction should have the consequence of waiving, after sufficient time, claims of criminality against people justifiably relying upon the winks, nods and long-time neighborliness of the reality on American soil, if not the letter of laws printed on paper that are only enforced against those committing felonies against persons or property.

This does not mean that long-term residents whose first act in America was to illegally cross its border are “entitled” to ALL privileges and immunities of full citizenship. The United States has long admitted non-citizen residents under various terms and circumstances. Congress has that constitutional power.

The root word of “amnesty” is “amnesia”. Americans, collectively, conveniently suffered selective amnesia for decades as we welcomed the cheap labor our birth control-pill and abortion-assisted affluence desired. But long-term amnesia has consequences that are inconsistent with the Judeo-Christian principles that inform American concepts of due process if we arbitrarily decide to once again “remember” un-enforced laws against human beings that have become our neighbors over time. Inaction over time matters.

Human beings that we have long accepted as our neighbors should not be used as pawns to obtain other, even laudable, goals. The United States, like any “nation” worthy of the description, ought to control who can enter their sovereign territory. The drafters and ratifiers of the Fourteenth Amendment didn’t intend to confer the power to confer U.S. citizenship to the whims of mothers in labor. But executive and legislative actions, even if not precisely-on-point Supreme Court decisions (yes, I am aware of the Wong and other decisions, with dicta that is cited to support the contrary view), that confer birthright citizenship, have obtained for decades and so are the de facto and de jure law.

But even those un-felonious, long-term non-citizen residents that do not have custody of children who breathed their first breaths on the Fruited Plain should not be jerked around with un-just applications of the letter of the law posing as the Rule of Law. Is America to be a nation of miserable Inspector Javerts relentless pursuing Jean Valjeans? For the equivalent of a loaf of bread stolen and a probation officer not reported too? God forbid. God says “an eye for an eye”. Let the punishment be proportionate to the crime.

We will not have border security while President Barack Obama resides at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, much as we didn’t while Messrs. H.W. Bush, Clinton and W. Bush resided there. Border security agents are suing the President for the right to enforce the law. Seems safe to assume that they aren’t in a labor union given that they can get paid by not doing their job, but I digress.

The only possible border security we could trust with Obama in charge of law enforcement would be a physical fence he can’t speak out of existence, and Obama ain’t building no fence that doesn’t immediately surround where he lays his head at night.

Republicans should do justice by the 11 million. Justice does not require a “path to FULL citizenship”. It does require non-selective amnesia, i.e. amnesty defined as the right to remain in this nation (that has by its actions and inaction accepted them for many years as their neighbors) and exercise their unalienable human rights to life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Those rights do not include the right to vote, ever, but I would be satisfied with a 10-year or more rule, if not a lifetime ban.

Amnesty is not a dirty word. We collectively had amnesia when it suited us. We can’t now, consistent with our values, forget to continue to forget. Justice for the 11 million requires that we at least stop treating them like criminals. Now.

Their justice should not be held hostage to our inability to agree on mom, apple pie, baseball or border security; or out of proportion concern for “magnets”.  Magnets drawing people that yearn to breathe free, unrelated to even the strict rule of law advocated by those opposing any amnesty, are so much greater than occasional amnesties as to render them puny, and if the day ever comes when people won’t be drawn here, those already here won’t be living in the City of the Hill.

Compare the insistence of some conservatives to only deal with the plight and destiny of the 11 million after we secure the border, to those liberals who claim that to be against abortion one must be for whatever welfare state they insistent upon in order that these babies “forced” upon the mothers are paid for my those insisting on their birth. The moral choice is clear. Killing babies is morally wrong no matter the funding for food stamps.

Non-voting rights amnesty for the 11 million now.

G. Sand Lapper aka

Mike DeVine

“One man with courage makes a majority.” – Andrew Jackson

Editor – Hillbilly Politics

Co-Founder and Editor – Political Daily

Atlanta Law & Politics columnist – Examiner.com

COMMENTS

  • checkmate2012

    GC, it’s a conundrum indeed and agree that its one of our own governments making by not enforcing the laws over the many years. The problem is, if the 11M are allowed to stay without consequence, won’t that be a magnet? And if tomorrow, the US stated that today is the day we enforce the laws, and I enter illegally the next day, why wouldn’t I get the same compassion…I mean I’m just one day past the gov’t overcoming its amnesia!
    .
    The people of the US are generally kind and compassionate and so are most of the illegals here. Personally, I believe Mexicans are very friendly and kind and family oriented. And I agree that they should be able to stay here, since the gov’t let them in and remain here by turning a blind. I don’t think they should be able to vote ever and I’m ok with a DREAMer deal, for those 21 and under.
    .
    But whatever we do, it has to be fixed permanently so we don’t have to revisit the issue with another 10M in a decade. Unfortunately, we can’t trust the gov’t to fix/enforce anything or count out the special interest groups that want to settle everything in court to push their agenda that is usually against the best interest of conservatives.

    • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

      But seriously, yes, while our exceptional qualities and weaknesses are magnets, that issue is puny as compared to justice for the 11 million, but, in any event should not preempt taking moral action for the 11 million. Yes, if we don’t correct the law going forward we might have to do it again. But that elected majorities won’t secure the border doesn’t exonerate us from treating individuals in the shoes of long time neighbors justly based on the circumstances…and on that basis it is no longer a conundrum for me….imho…but I respect most all views on the matter.

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

    “Fixed permanently”? By humans?…the ultimate poison pill? Unless the issue is castration…. smile

    • checkmate2012

      Ok, I give! How about “fixed” with all the vigor and effort as someone protects something dear, say a child. Protect and defend the border and leave the 11M out of the conversation, let them stay here, as I just posted to ss??? (spam).
      .
      But your post is worth reading in today’s context and sorry I missed it originally. I hope others read it and ponder it. Thanks GC! I value your opinion and want to hear from you on my posts too, btw!

      • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

        ditto bro

        • checkmate2012

          not ditto bro, ditto sis! and I see the comments are back now. Weird. checkmate2012 is a female :)

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

            Yes, I recognize you now as the White Queen I just corned a Black King with! But I had wondered what we could have said that would have moved the PowersThatBe to excise our heterosexual mate of wisdom…smile

  • checkmate2012

    GC- Our last two comments are gone- poof! Bizarre. And that’s sis, not bro!

    • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

      No comprendi.

  • Viet71

    G.C.,

    Your words ring true.

    If I have a fraternity party circa 1964 and make it open door, some will enter the frat who are low-down or rascally. Some will come for good fun. Some will come who are curious and either stay or leave.

    In the back will be be a garbage can filled with grape juice and grain alcohol.

    You can have fun. Dancing with your girl. Drinking.

    Ultimately, you close the frat doors and shut down the party.

    You don’t screw over the interlopers.

  • fromthesidelines

    By far, the best commentary I’ve seen yet on this subject. I have been mulling this from different perspectives. In yours, I found the center I was looking for. Thank you.

  • focusedthought

    I’m glad I saw this. This is an excellent discussion of this issue and provided convincing arguments for a middle of the road approach to immigration.

    If we could get an agreement that for amnesty did not involve a path to citizenship, but did involve allowing them to legally stay here, I would be open to that. I still think we need to build a fence though so that we have some control over who is able to get into our country though.