I got an email this week asking me to contact my legislators and urge them to support the passage of a private bill "for the relief of Elvira Arellano. The text of the bill was not provided, so I looked it up to see what I was being asked to support. Basically, the bill asks for amnesty for Elvira now, and for the number of legal immigrants allowed from Mexico next year to be reduced by one, to account for her.

I don't support this bill at all. Elvira has come to this country illegallly not once but twice, and already been deported once. I would imagine that when someone decides to take the risk of entering another country illegally, that the risk of being caught and sent back is probably on their mind as well. This bill would bump Elvira to the head of the line over Mexicans who are entering the country legally, as well as absolves her of responsibility for her past criminal actions. I fail to see the injustice being perpetrated on her personally in this instance - she did the crime, got caught, and is now expected to do the time for it.

That being said, while I am not inclined to support Elvira staying in the country just because she wants to, I do believe that she should be permitted to stay as the parent of a U.S. citizen who is a minor. This is a loophole in immigration law and in this instance I support being resolved in favor of the U.S. citizen. The feds (rightfully) can't deport Saul, but it's heartless and cruel to deport his mother and force the issue of him staying or leaving that way. If the current administration wants to be the party of family values, they need to walk that walk all the time, not just when they want to. Separating parents and children is wrong; thus, I can support Elvira staying on that ground alone. I did contact my legislators to urge that this aspect of immigration law be clarified - either some kind of parental amnesty be granted to someone in Elvira and Saul's situation, or that the law be changed to eliminate the "you're born here, you're a citizen" aspect. It's got to be resolved one way or the other.

I'm writing this today because I'm genuinely puzzled about Elvira's story and unsure of why I am being asked to support her. Is this issue about -her- rights being infringed upon? I don't see how she is being wronged - she broke existing immigration law on multiple occasions and should not be surprised she is being asked to take the responsibility for her actions. Is it about her son's rights being infringed upon? That's the only argument where I am finding the justification for support. I realize that a majority of people that read this site will not agree with me, and that's fine - I'm genuinely open to reasoning from Elvira's supporters, because right now the issue is very muddled to me. Everything I have heard from Elvira's side so far is simply about "let her stay" but does not acknowlege that SHE IS HERE ILLEGALLY. Why does that not matter in this case? If Elvira is permitted to stay and her case becomes precedent, do we just throw out the entire law and allow open immigration indefinitely? What exactly is the change that is being sought here?

I'm hoping for some honest, thoughtful discussion in response to this.