I came across an interesting blog post today, exploring various Democrat governors who are expressing skepticism towards the Department of Justice’s decision to sue the state of Arizona over its recently enacted law, SB 1070:
If you can ignore some of the reflexively partisan follow-up comments, you’ll find an interesting discussion about both the relative merits of the lawsuit itself and whether or not Illinois should emulate Arizona in its pursuit of enforcing long dormant immigration laws.
With regard to the lawsuits, my own belief is that Attorney General Holder is now preemptively claiming racial profiling-before anyone has been detained as a result of SB 1070-because the Department of Justice is not confident that the preemption doctrine is applicable in this case. As noted attorney Andrew McCarthy explained during an interview on WOR, a landmark 1975 Supreme Court decision established the precedent that states may enforce immigration laws, so long as the state laws do not contravene existing federal laws, which-as anyone who’s taken the time to scrutinize SB 1070 knows-the Arizona law doesn’t. But the relative wisdom of Mr. Holder’s legal strategy is not as interesting as a topic raised by one of the commenters to the linked story. Namely, the amount of illegal aliens living in Illinois who come from Poland and Eastern European countries.
To me, this is a key point to examine in the broader debate over immigration and the status of illegal aliens. For many in the opposite camp, the sole reason anyone would oppose amnesty is because he or she is some Eurocentric xenophobe who furtively harbors deeply-seated ill will towards non-white, non-European individuals. The logical flaw in this chain of reasoning is that-as pointed out in the thread above-there are many white Europeans who are also residing in this country illegally. Not just Polish construction workers living in Chicago whose visas have expired, but Irish barkeeps and the unemployed living in neighborhoods like Woodside, Queens and Hell’s Kitchen, New York.
How, then, do the proponents of amnesty, usually the first to lob accusations of racism or xenophobia at their ideological antagonists, explain the rather robust opposition to welcoming lawbreakers from ethnic backgrounds and nationalities so closely resembling those of our lineal ancestors? If opposition to illegal aliens is merely rooted in bigotry and white supremacy, isn’t it odd that these same “restrictionists” also want to remove most, if not all, of the illegal aliens who come from EU member states?
Something to mull over.
Hat tip: http://itismymind.blogspot.com/