Kudos to Civitas’ own Max Borders on this article published in the Greensboro News-Record. Borders uses the recent community college/illegal immigrant issue as a backdrop for the broader issue of the rule of law.
"Despite the rhetoric, those who would simply ignore the law for the sake of what they consider to be a nobler good not only undermine the rule of law but what it means to be a citizen. And while voices charging xenophobia are growing louder, this issue is not about blood and soil. It is ultimately about respect for fundamental institutions."
He closes the piece with a slap at the damaging notion being put forth by fringe groups that if one doesn’t like a law, you should break it:
"Citizenship is not some arbitrary designation. It is membership in a political community, and it carves out a special, two-way relationship between a person and the institutions of the state. We may all agree that the process for becoming a citizen is long and burdensome and should be less so. But that doesn’t mean the rights and privileges of citizenship should fall like manna from heaven until our system of naturalization is reformed. If we think they should, then we are saying that the appropriate mechanism for change is not judicial, legislative or democratic processes at all but lawbreaking. If reform occurs outside our legal order, that order has been made impotent. At that point, we are no longer a nation of laws, but a nation of caprice. Citizenship and order have then become curiosities of a bygone era."
merci buckets.
Max…it is interesting that you reference the US Constitution in your article promoting the supremacy of the rule of law.
Given that the president is constitutionally required to faithfully execute the laws of the land…what is your position on President Bush and his admitted violation of warrantless surveillance of American citizens? When the president of the United States acts without regard to the law, is there any greater threat to the rule of law? If true, would you publicly support impeachment hearings? Would you at least publicly support independent investigation of these events? Did Civitas have an opinion on this?
Until you and your organization are willing to support investigating President Bush…you have no business invoking the “rule of law.” What is more of a threat to our democracy and our Constitution…340 students trying to take community college courses or a President who is above the law?
I don’t see that you or Civitas has any credibility on this subject.
Welcome back, Steve. First, at Civitas we concentrate almost exclusively on state-level issues, which is why we don’t often weigh in on Iraq, CIA activities, etc., unless it’s on the blog. So it’s not in our charter to take shots at the President on such issues (nor Nancy Pelosi nor Harry Reid)–indeed we focus on policy, not politics. But there is A LOT I take issue with when it comes to the Prez (Medicare Part-B, ethanol, steel tariffs, some civil liberties issues).
No, I personally don’t support warrantless surveillance of American citizens, but this may not be as simple an issue as you think. First, it’s very likely that such surveillance is carried out a) when one party is a non-citizen, and b) often when the information is gathered through computer dragnet algorithms (probable cause?). I’m not sure if these represent a mitigating factor for one party or the other (i.e. the gov’t or the surveilled). But it’s not a simple issue to resolve here — particularly when innocent lives could be at stake.
I’m not sure how you got me to discuss all of this in the context of a community college-illegal immigration debate. Seems like a bit of a non-sequitur — born out of the kind of hostility you seem to share with Fitzsimon. (And by the way, instead of addressing the issue of the rule of law, you chose to attack my credibility — which is a fallacy.) But whether or not you think Civitas is credible to discuss the rule of law — well, that’s your opinion. A lot of people do think we’re credible. And that’s all that matters… Which leaves the question: if in some parallel universe you thought Civitas and Bush satisfactorily preserved the rule of law on the issue of wiretapping, would you concede the point about illegals in community colleges being an effront to the rule of law?
Max…I did not question your personal credibility; only on this subject (“rule of law”) in this specific context.
In answer to your other question, no. I do not believe illegals in community colleges are an affront to the law. We need comprehensive immigration reform, including border security. Having said that, we do have the problem of 12-20 illegal immigrants living in our country. If you think they can and should be deported…by all means use the “rule of law” to justify that position.
If, on the other hand, like me you think we need to find a way to bring these people “out of the shadows,” then I don’t see how posturing about the rule of law with community college students is helpful.
Why not focus all your emotional energy on a solution, rather than a meaningless punitive gesture twards college students trying to better themselves? Let’s assume that at some point in the next 1-2 years a comprehensive plan is enacted which will provide these students a pathway to citizenship. Will you feel proud about your role in all of this? We Americans have ignored these laws for years because nobody from either party had the political courage to fix it. Your actions now seem both petty and counterproductive. You ought to be focusing your energy on immigration reform, not on community college students.
typo…12 -20 million illegal immigrants
All I’m saying is, if – as your kind argue – there are only 340 illegals in the system, why throw the rule of law out with the bathwater? That’s what you’re saying. No, I believe in comprehensive immigration reform. In fact, I personally think we need something close to amnesty — both to get people out of the shadows and get them paying taxes for what they consume. If we did that, they (might) be able to go to community colleges — although there is still a question of what is reserved for citizens. Why should goodies be showered on all comers just because they come to these shores? Indeed, if this is about more than geography, why not build tax-subsidized community colleges in Mexico? Surely your Mercedes Marxism has its bounds. But in terms of us (i.e. civitas) working on comprehensive immigration reform? That is largely a federal matter — so if you have any ideas about what N.C. can do, I’m all ears.
Per the comment about President Bush and the rule of law. I would propose — and do propose in my piece, “Debating Illegal Immigration at UNC” — impeaching any president, including George W. Bush, who encourages or induces illegal immigration “in reckless disregard of the fact” that it violates U.S. law. No president, much less the North Carolina Community College System, is above the law.