Trump’s “Tough” Immigration Policy Leaves Out Employers

Below is my column on the recent controversy over a threatened tariff against Mexico for its failure to stop undocumented immigrants from crossing the U.S. border. Despite the last-minute deal with Mexico purportedly avoiding the tariff, President Donald Trump was back on the weekend threatening “very profitable tariffs” on Mexico. Whatever the purpose of such tariffs, however, they are unlikely to solve our problem with unlawful immigration absent greater enforcement on this side of the border. My point is not to call for wholesale prosecutions. Indeed, the primary concern is not the hiring by families or small businesses, but rather large operations with large percentages of undocumented workers.  If there government truly wants to curtail the undocumented workforce (and that is uncertain), hammering the immigrants at the border or attempting mass deportations is unlikely to succeed. There remains a striking disconnect between the level of enforcement directed at undocumented individuals as opposed to large employers of undocumented persons.

Here is the column:

President Donald Trump has long defined his immigration policies as simply a matter of toughness. Indeed, making the border crossing tougher has been the overriding thrust of his deterrence effort. He has complained to border agents that he would love to see them get “a little rough” but that “when you do all of these things that we have to do, they end up arresting border patrol people.” He even threatened a 25 percent tariff on all goods from Mexico for its failure to prevent people from crossing the border.

Yet, no hardship has deterred millions on this dangerous journey because jobs waits on the other side of the border. To remove that attraction, the government would have to get tough not on migrants but on those who hire them. But that is a tad too tough, it seems, for most immigration hawks. According to a recent study, the Justice Department prosecuted only 11 employers in the entire nation last year. With Pew Research Center estimating that about 11 million undocumented persons are living and working in the United States, the Justice Department is prosecuting at a rate of just one employer for every one million undocumented persons.

Immigration, it seems, is an offense committed solely by undocumented persons. While the president has charged that undocumented workers take away jobs from citizens, neither political party appears eager to deal with those employers who give away those jobs, despite undocumented persons making up an estimated 5 percent of the workforce. In California, Nevada, and Texas, they make up almost 10 percent of the workforce.

Toughness does not extend to those who benefit most from unlawful hiring. There are no federal agents being asked to get “a little rough” with corporate executives. On paper, federal law is clear and tough. It is illegal to hire, recruit, or refer illegal immigrants for hire. It also is illegal to fail to verify work authorization. Knowledge of unlawful hiring can be inferred from the lack of proof or from suspicious job applications.

Moreover, the laws are based on the assumption of enforcement actions that ratchet up punishment to deter repeat offenders. The penalty for every illegal worker rises from $2,000 to as much as $10,000 by the third offense. Knowingly hiring illegal workers can result in six months of jail, while “harboring” such workers can result in up to 10 years in prison. Yet, if there is little enforcement, then the hiring of undocumented persons remains not just a cost of doing business but a small cost in general.

The government continues to publicizes splashy cases, such as the large $5.5 million fine against Waste Management of Texas. Yet, these relatively rare actions pose little threat to most businesses, as shown by the rising numbers of illegal workers in the workforce. Classic economic theory treats the deterrence of crime as the relationship between the rate of detection and the severity of the punishment. If the rate of detection is high, penalties can be low and still achieve deterrence. If the rate of detection is low, the deterrence theory would prompt high penalties.

The curious thing is that this is a federal offense being committed out in plain sight. Certain industries are open recidivists in violation of federal immigration law. As much as half of our farmworkers across the country are believed to be undocumented, while 15 percent of employees in construction jobs and almost 10 percent of fast food and domestic help are also believed to be working illegally. One would think that, at less than a dozen prosecutions of employers, detection rates are virtually zero.

Detection, however, appears quite high, with one out of every two workers in agriculture being undocumented. For a rational actor, the low level of prosecution is an invitation to violate federal law. According to a recent study, only three employers were sentenced to jail out of 11 prosecutions. That puts the rate of prosecution at slightly above cases forharassing golfers in a national park (18 U.S.C. 165 & 36 CFR Sec. 7.96(b)(3)) or attempting to change the weather without notifying the Secretary of Commerce (15 U.S.C. §§330a & 330d ).

harassing golfers in any national park in Washington State or attempting to change the weather without notifying the head of the Commerce Department.

This is not a call for wholesale prosecutions but, rather, for some clear semblance of continuity and consistency in our policies. The case for tougher immigration laws would be stronger if the Trump administration showed the same vigor with regard to both parties to illegal employment. There does seem to be a growing immigration crisis, with sharp increases in unlawful border crossings and the need to reform immigration laws.

However, the dichotomy in enforcement against workers and employers undermines the call to action by President Trump. Most undocumented persons come to the United States for work. Those offering them work are the draw, and sending just three of them to jail is unlikely to change the realities of the market. In the end, widespread of arrests of undocumented persons does little, due to the simple realities of enforcement. We simply cannot jail millions of people or transport them all out of the country.

On the other hand, the number of major employers is far smaller and would be susceptible to deterrent policies of prosecution. It is possible to change the dynamic, but that would mean getting “a little rougher” on the back end of the illegal immigration system. Of course, there is another possibility. While denouncing undocumented workers, Congress and the White House have little interest in removing them from the workforce. We need these workers so, instead, we round up a couple thousand of them in factories and restaurants while effectively ignoring the employers.

The new deal with Mexico, announced late on Friday by President Trump, is an undeniable achievement. It includes a reported agreement to have migrants return to Mexico pending the resolution of their asylum claims. While it is difficult to see how Mexico will humanely house hundreds of thousands of people, the agreement could indeed deter some people from crossing, or at least from surrendering when they reach the United States. For the rest, the calculus of risk remains unchanged, so long as willing employers remain waiting just on the other side of the border.

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. You can follow him on Twitter @JonathanTurley.

134 thoughts on “Trump’s “Tough” Immigration Policy Leaves Out Employers”



    Two of the Trump administration’s top agricultural trade officials told Congress on Tuesday they didn’t have details of any agreement with Mexico to buy more U.S. farm goods that President Donald Trump had promised over the weekend.

    Trump tweeted Saturday that “Mexico has agreed to immediately begin buying large quantities of agricultural product from our great patriot farmers!” Mexican officials indicated they had made no such commitment and some suggested instead that agricultural trade might increase naturally without tariffs in the way and if the new NAFTA deal is ratified.

    During a House Agriculture Committee hearing today, Rep. Angie Craig (D-Minn.) asked top officials from the Agriculture Department and Office of the U.S. Trade Representative if they could clarify which farm products and how much Mexico would potentially be purchasing.

    “I don’t have any details to that regard,” said Gregg Doud, USTR’s chief agricultural negotiator.

    USDA Undersecretary Ted McKinney also said he didn’t have any information either but “we’ve got things in line if they are serious about wanting to make some immediate purchases. So we’re always ready to deal, but we have to get clarification first.”

    Craig said it “seems odd that the president has made this announcement and has yet to tell” his agriculture and trade officials. “So is the president promising additional purchases without that being true, or has [USDA and USTR] just not been told yet what the president is promising?” she asked.

    Edited from: “USDA, Trade Officials Can’t Explain Trump’s Promise Of Mexican Ag Purchases”

    Today’s Politico

    1. Peter, what seems to confuse you is they say, “I don’t have any details to that regard,” That is the extent of the article that you glorify.

      You can remain confused like you are that the GDP has done so well and so much better than under Obama.

  2. OT: Did DOJ Reward Bruce Ohr for Targeting President Trump?
    Time for prosecutor John Durham to follow the money.

    June 11, 2019

    “Bruce Ohr, the Justice Department official whose connection to the opposition research firm responsible for the anti-Trump ‘dossier’ led to his eventual demotion, was awarded a $28,000 performance bonus while the Russia probe was ongoing.”

    That is from a June 7 report by Alex Pappas of Fox News, based on “newly released DOJ documents.” Those documents do not indicate why Ohr received the bonus, but they do reveal the DOJ man also bagged a $14,520 bonus the year before. The DOJ documents, in turn, were not produced by any congressional committee, the DOJ inspector general, or some government whistleblower. …

    The pay records of James Comey, Lisa Page and Peter Strzok might also be of interest, along with members of Robert Mueller’s team, including Mueller himself. Only a fool would fail to look into it.

    Complete story below:

  3. “On paper, federal law is clear and tough. It is illegal to hire, recruit, or refer illegal immigrants for hire. It also is illegal to fail to verify work authorization.”

    That’s nice in the legal world but not where the rubber meets the road. Given the number of employers and number of ICE agents it is impossible to do a good job of uncovering the bad actors. This requires a change in law that would mandate use of E-Verify. That system could be integrated with other computer systems thereby making it much easier to keep track of employers. Some states have taken action but it needs to be federal.

  4. They can wade though parts of the Rio Grande River. I doubt that Trump or anyone else “makes them” do that.




    Today, farmworkers in the California earn about $30,000 a year if they work full time — about half the overall average pay in the state. Most work fewer hours.

    Some farmers are even giving laborers benefits normally reserved for white-collar professionals, like 401(k) plans, health insurance, subsidized housing and profit-sharing bonuses. Full-timers at Silverado Farming, for example, get most of those sweeteners, plus 10 paid vacation days, eight paid holidays, and can earn their hourly rate to take English classes.

    But the raises and new perks have not tempted native-born Americans to leave their day jobs for the fields. Nine in 10 agriculture workers in California are still foreign born, and more than half are undocumented, according to a federal survey.

    Instead, companies growing high-value crops, like Cabernet Sauvignon grapes in Napa, are luring employees from fields in places like Stockton that produce cheaper wine grapes or less profitable fruits and vegetables.

    Growers who can’t raise wages are losing their employees and dealing with it by mechanizing, downsizing or switching to less labor-intensive crops.

    Chalmers R. Carr III, the president of Titan Farms, a South Carolina peach giant, told lawmakers at a 2013 hearing that he advertised 2,000 job openings from 2010 through 2012. Carr said he was paying $9.39, $2 more than the state’s minimum wage at the time.

    He hired 483 U.S. applicants, slightly less than a quarter of what he needed; 109 didn’t show up on the first day. Another 321 of them quit, “the vast majority in the first two days,” Carr testified. Only 31 lasted for the entire peach season.

    “The law of supply and demand doesn’t stop being true just because you’re talking about people,” says George Borjas, a Harvard economist and prominent foe of unfettered immigration. “[Farmers] have had an almost endless supply of low-skill workers for a long time, and now they are finding it difficult to transition to a situation where they don’t.”

    Borjas believes the ones who reap the rewards of immigration are employers — not just farmers, but restaurant owners and well-to-do homeowners who hire landscapers and housekeepers. The people who suffer most are American workers, who contend with more competition for jobs and lower pay.

    But Silverado, the farm labor contracting company in Napa, has never had a white, American-born person take an entry-level gig, even after the company increased hourly wages to $4 above the minimum. And Silverado is far from unique.

    U.S. workers filled just 2% of a sample of farm labor vacancies advertised in 1996, according to a report published by the Labor Department’s office of inspector general. “I don’t think anybody would dispute that that’s roughly the way it is now” as well, says Philip Martin, an economist at UC Davis and one of the country’s leading experts on agriculture.

    Edited from: “Wages Rise On California Farms. Americans Still Don’t Want The Jobs”

    The Los Angeles Times, 3/17/17

      1. Illegal aliens depress wages, which makes the jobs non competitive for legal residents and citizens. Conventional farms have health hazards for those working in the fields. Illegal immigration allows both to persist. Illegal immigration has also changed the makeup of many industries, as legal residents and citizens cannot compete with the under the table wages.

        That’s why I buy organic – it’s not just about the health of the produce, but of the workers who produce it.

    1. PETER,
      None of that precludes having legal immigrants with green cards doing the agricultural, etc. kinds of work. I don’t think anyone is denying that that some farmers are heavily reliant on migrant labor.
      I don’t see any problem with that as long as they’re here legally.

      1. Yeah, Tom, special programs could be implemented for ‘Guest Workers’.

        But the article is significant in the sense that Trump supporters frequently argue that ‘California is exploiting illegals’. When in reality, farm workers are typically better paid than employees of big box retailers and fast food chains. But farm work is tough, no doubt about it.

    2. Peter, plenty of other nations survive just fine without massive illegal immigration. America has relied upon illegal immigrants to do dirty jobs for so long, because the flood has gone on so long. In addition, it’s a workaround to avoid the expense of all the costly increases to labor that people keep voting for. If Americans won’t work, then the country has a problem.

      Work visas address jobs that are not filled.

      Perhaps, if the only worker pool were legal residents and citizens, there would be market pressure to do away with the toxic pesticides that plague illegal aliens with an inordinate number of health problems. Ever read about pregnant women working our fields and the resulting birth defects?

      Working on organic, pesticide-free farms is so attractive that in some areas, it’s a cool job to have. I go picking in organic orchards with my kid, and would welcome him having a summer job on an organic farm when he’s a teenager. But I’d never in a million years allow him to work on a conventional farm with all the toxic exposure. That’s what illegal aliens are exposed to every day, the system that is being encouraged.

      Have a dirty job? Get an illegal to do it because no American would stoop so low. Is that the message you want to go with, here? This is how we’ve created an untouchable caste in America. It needs to stop.

      1. The Peter Liberal:

        For illegal immigration
        For the environment
        For entitlements

        That means Peter wants illegal immigrants to work in the fields that despoil our environment and take entitlements that are supposed to go to Americans that are needy.

        Peter is so conflicted that he can’t defend any arguments he makes.

  6. Turley wrote, “That puts the rate of prosecution at slightly above cases for harassing golfers in a national park (18 U.S.C. 165 & 36 CFR Sec. 7.96(b)(3)) or attempting to change the weather without notifying the Secretary of Commerce (15 U.S.C. §§330a & 330d ).”

    L4D says–OMG! I’m a hardened criminal. I had no idea. Honestly, how was I supposed to know that I had to notify the Secretary of Commerce before I attempt to . . . [Redacted for Rule 6(E) Grand Jury Material] . . .

    Golfers in National Parks??? And we can’t harass them????? I’m picturing Trump in a golf cart with Wilbur Ross in Yosemite. Pik-a-nik baskets. The both of them are. Nyum nyum.

    1. i posted something recently about how the federal prosecutors have to plead and prove these cases. they are hard to make and low yield in terms of punishment. it’s high hanging fruit, quite simply, in a social situation where there is a lot of low hanging fruit for prosecutors. that’s just the way it is. no conspiracy nor is it a partisan issue much at all, Dem and Rep AUSAs will bring these cases if the evidence presents and they are worth the hassle.

  7. Too comment objectively. if you buy Tyson’s you are supporting illegal employers. Who does Tyson support in elections. Remember Hillary’s strange $100,000 win in the Chicago Markets?

    Remember which corporation got the contract for providing eggs and poultry products to the military bases? Damn! Same name but before it was Foster Farms.Which country provides the most foreign employees to the fish catching industry? Damn Same Name.

    Which corporation committed and still commits conspiracy to defraud selling computers that don’t really work under the motto. Get it on the market fix it later and guess which party they support in elections. MS and DNC.

    Which industry oversells seat space and then seats people who bought their tickets AFTER they sold more space than they had and worse seats them before those who bought early.

    Airlines. US Scare, Fly United, among others

    Just personal observations and experience.

    How many of these have been taken to task?


    Wait until Lizzie Borden Warren takes over…..

  8. Well, it’s about time Jon addressed the other side of the equation, assuming illegal immigration is really an issue that Republicans want to solve, which Jon assumes. However, Republicans don’t want to do away with illegal immigration for the simple reason that illegals will work for less than minimum wage, will work in undesirable and unsafe conditions, they rarely make workers comp, unemployment and sexual harassment claims, don’t demand any fringe benefits and thus increase profits. Illegals are not hard to find. Go to any hotel housekeeping service, landscaping, home cleaning service, pallet factory, non-union construction site and fast food place. You’ll find them, and their employers, if you wanted to, but Republicans don’t want to. The documentation for working legally does not exist, will not be in their records. Proving a violation of immigration law would be a cake walk, but Republicans simply don’t want to stop illegal immigration. If the jobs dried up, which would happen if existing laws were enforced or even strengthened, the people would stop coming. That would be the safest and most cost-effective way to handle illegal immigration, if Republicans really wanted to stop it. Let’s face it–most of these people really aren’t starving to death or in constant, imminent danger. They just want a better life style that they can’t get in South America. The US could also help with the drug traffickers, if it wanted to, to make these countries safer. We could also help with educating them on farming, education and other aid to improve their economies, but we really don’t want to.

    What Republicans DO want is votes from whites without college educations, Evangelicals, older, prejudiced whites and others constituting the Trump base who feel threatened by brown people, so they pander to their prejudices about the brown rapists, murderers, drug dealers and criminals “invading” our southern borders. It’s just like abortion–wealthier women always did and will still get them regardless of what laws are passed, but stirring up the base to “save unborn babies” gets them to the polls, puts Republicans in office, so they can keep receiving their tax cuts, put radical conservatives on the federal benches, take away consumer protections and roll back environmental regulations, which is the REAL agenda. The common thread in all of this is MONEY! That’s what Republicans stand for–not patriotism, upholding the Constitution or any other lofty American value. That’s why they do not criticize Trump, no matter how outrageous his behavior, how many lies he tells, how many women he fondles and brags about, nor how he disrespects the honored dead at Normandy, by showing up, criticizing his opponents with grave markers in the background, being himself a draft-dodger.

    And, Jon, I fully disagree with the proposition: “The new deal with Mexico, announced late on Friday by President Trump, is an undeniable achievement.” What “new deal”? All you have is the word of an Administration that lies constantly to try to make Der Orange Fuehrer look good. Republicans told Trump not to impose the tariffs because it would hurt the economy in the long-run, and that if he proceeded, they would publicly oppose him. Mexico simply does NOT have the national guard numbers or resources to turn back people at the southern border. I’d bet, too, that Trump is handing them hundreds of millions or billions of my and your tax dollars to house migrants, if they do it at all. Mexico wouldn’t do this out of the goodness of its heart, AND, don’t forget, the politically-connected contractors are putting $750 per day per detainee of our tax money in their pockets, and are making a killing, and they donate to Republicans.

      1. EVERY city that houses employers who hire illegals are sanctuary cities. Depends on your perspective, but so long as Trump and the Republicans can stir up the base against cities in Democratic areas, that’s what they’ll do.

        1. The political leadership of a jurisdiction is what determines sanctuary city status/ policy.
          The farmer down the road from me who might have some illegals in the migrant crew harvesting onions or asparagus or working the orchards isn’t setting sanctuary city policy, and may well live in a jurisdiction that does not have santuary city status.
          Nice try at deflection and muddling the issue, anyway.

        2. No, Natacha. The definition of a sanctuary city is one in which government officials do not cooperate with the fed’s efforts to uphold immigration law.

          Meanwhile, legal residents and citizens get screwed over. Again.

          1. How do you define “cooperate”? Hold arrestees indefinitely until ICE shows up, which is whenever? It’s not the job of local government to pay the cost to hold people who otherwise could bond out of jail.

            1. Natacha – if you do not understand the process of cooperating with an ICE detainer, then look it up.

      I haven’t tracked a running total of the numbers, but the frequency of these types of raids, and the illegal migrants caught up and detained, seems to have greatly increased.
      I agree that the employers, too, need to be held accountable. But for that to happen, there needs to be evidence presented that they knowingly hired illegals.
      Fake IDs, documents are often presented to employers. In jurisdictions where illegals can legally get valid ID……driver’s licenses for example…..there’s no need to present fake ID.

      1. There is an e-verify hotline, so an employer can immediately determine whether an ID is fake. But, as a Trumpster, you’d be willing to believe that these illegals, most of whom can’t even speak English, can come up with credible fake IDs. Whatever happened to the “deportation squads”? Along with mass arrests of illegals would be arresting their employers, but the deportation raids aren’t happening because Republicans don’t really want to stop illegal immigration. What I don’t understand is why Trumpsters don’t see through this.

        1. As one of the more extreme TDS lunatics, Natacha does wish to know that there has been a major uptick in raids on businesses with substantial numbers of workers here illegally.
          If there were no crackdown, as she likes to pretend, she’d rant about lack of enforcement.
          She’d just shift gears and wail about increased enforcement if she had her facts straight, and knee that was the case.
          Such are the trials of a genuine, TDS banshee.

        2. Yes, fake IDs that can pass are a booming business in illegal aliens, which you would know if you took 60 seconds to look up the crime statistics.

          Here we have states fighting all the way to the Supreme Court for the right to fight identity theft of illegal aliens.

          Another pervasive category is the use of fraudulent identity documents by aliens to enter the United States illegally to obtain employment and other benefits. The prevalence of identity theft appears to be growing. Moreover, identity theft is not typically a stand-alone crime; rather identity theft is usually a component of one or more white-collar or financial crimes. According to Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) officials, the use of fraudulent documents by aliens is extensive, with INS inspectors intercepting tens of thousands of fraudulent documents at ports of entry in each of the last few years. These documents were presented by aliens attempting to enter the United States to seek employment or obtain naturalization or permanent residency status. Federal investigations have shown that some aliens use fraudulent documents in connection with more serious illegal activities, such as narcotics trafficking and terrorism. Efforts to combat identity fraud in its many forms likely will command continued attention for policymakers and law enforcement to include investigating and prosecuting perpetrators, as well as focusing on prevention measures to make key identification documents and information less susceptible to being counterfeited or otherwise used fraudulently.

          1. Remember that discussion about the study that found that illegal aliens commit less crimes than American citizens? I questioned that, since identity theft is so rampant. Turns out, many crimes weren’t included in the study, and it used estimates since immigration status of inmates is not tracked by state governments.


            virtually all adult, illegal aliens commit felonies in order to procure the documents they need to get jobs, to drive and to obtain other benefits that are restricted to U.S. citizens.

            The vast majority of illegal aliens use fraudulently obtained Social Security numbers. They possess fake drivers’ licenses, phony “green cards,” fraudulent birth certificates and any other documents that U.S. citizens and legal residents have. In addition, they falsify I-9 forms under penalty of perjury. Thus, the average illegal alien routinely commits multiple felonies –forgery, Social Security fraud, identity theft, and perjury.

            This criminal activity is routinely swept under the rug in order to protect the myth of the law abiding illegal alien. However, when pushed, even the strongest supporters of illegal aliens are forced to acknowledge that the vast majority of illegal aliens commit multiple felonies. In fact, the Social Security Administration and New York Times report that approximately 75 percent of illegal aliens have fraudulently obtained Social Security numbers which is a felony. The ACLU accepts this figure and uses it to show that illegal aliens pay payroll taxes.

            Furthermore, the Los Angeles Times reports that up to 8 million of 11.1 million (72 percent) illegal aliens commit job-related felonies. La Raza says that illegal aliens contribute $15 billion annually in Social Security payments through payroll taxes [by using illegally obtained Social Security numbers – felony].

            Mexican-born American journalist Jorge Ramos admits that many illegal aliens use “fake” documents (a felony).

            Even the president of the California State Senate admitted this month that “half” of his family “would be eligible for deportation under [President Trump’s] executive order, because if they got a false Social Security card, if they got a false identification, if they got a false driver’s license prior to us passing AB60, if they got a false green card, and anyone who has family members, you know, who are undocumented knows that almost entirely everybody has secured some sort of false identification (felonies).”

            I would qualify the above that California provides free drivers licenses to illegal aliens.

            1. Karen S.,
              I think it’s difficult to determine the rate of crime committed by illegal immigrants when so many jurisdictions don’t care about helping distinguish between legal and ilegal status.
              I had a great next door neighbor in a largely Hispanic part of town in the1990s. He was Mexican-American, probably a citizen and here legally,vraising a young family.
              Around busy farm times….e.g., harvest, etc. he’d have a lot of ” visitors”😉at his house for months. They kept an extremely low profiile, and I doubt that they were in the U.S. legally.
              Nobody cared, and even if people in the neighborhood knew ( many probably did), nobody was inclined to turn them in. I sold my house a few years later, and within a year or two, incidents of drive-by shootings we’re we’re happening within a block of my old house. I’ve gone into some detail before in the number of previously unheard- of drive- by and other shootings in that community. They , and other imajor incidents involving gang violence, are almost exclusively Hispanic on Hispanic incidents, and that corresponded with a large increase in the Hispanic population from the early 1990s on.
              Even IF anyone in the area or region is keeping track of the legal/ illegal status…..which is doubtful… can be a long way ” up the chain” IF they’re relaying that information to federal officials/ statisticians.
              So I’m very skeptical of the results of any “studies” in the subject of legal v.illegal crime rate. I can relate what I’ve observed in different communities where an extremely large spike in the crime rate has correspodended
              with a large increase in the Hispanic population.
              I can’t necessarily extrapolate that statewide or nationwide, nor do I have any way of knowing if a Spanish- speaking resident arrested for murder us here legally or not . There are indications that some cities don’t care about tracking that distinction, either.

              1. I agree. When there is such resistance to gathering data, then there are estimates whose accuracy is impossible to determine.

                Returning the citizenship question to the census would have been one small step, but Democrats fought it.

        3. Natacha

          Trumpsters see through it. They deflect in order to avoid the truth.

          1. ha ha what you whiners like natch think about migration is simplistic partisan and foolish. maybe this is what you think from the tidy confines of campus or the gated suburb or the yuppie enclave.

            you are basically running an apology factor grooming the next crop of Democrat voters. well keep up the bad work, you’re faring poorly at it.

    2. Natacha, which is the party of the Sanctuary State, prohibiting law enforcement to cooperate with ICE detainees, even of rapists? Which one provided free drivers licenses to illegals in CA, and allowed them to buy cheap auto insurance with lower benefits required of legal residents? Which one wants to abolish ICE? Scholarships for illegals? In-state tuition for illegals? Automatic voter registration? Get out the vote in Spanish to illegal immigrant neighborhoods? Which one passionately fights any effort to purge the voter rolls of illegal aliens?

      The list goes on and on, and you want to blame the Republican Party for what? Not fighting hard enough? Democrats have gotten what they’ve wanted on illegal immigration every time. Look, for example, how hard they’re fighting just to build a wall, which is only one of the many steps needed to curb the tide. First they claimed the wall wouldn’t work. If that was the case, they should be happy to have another useless public works project employing people. But no, then it became that the wall was immoral. Wealthy politicians who live behind walled, gated communities, said with a straight face that building a wall was immoral. How could it be immoral if it didn’t work? Which meant that requiring all immigration to go through legal channels was immoral.

      This is complete rubbish, and a slap in the face to all citizens and legal residents, the latter of which are honored guests.

    3. Natasha is absolutely right. This country couldn’t function without the help of the ‘illegals.’ I would like to see the brown people go on a one-day work-stoppage/strike, just not show up for work, and we would hear the screams from every part of the country. The answer may well be bringing back the “Bracero” program, modified to fit the times, and fine/jail the transgressing employers. We all like fresh vegetables at good prices–all that would go away without the brown people. They put food on your table, live in hovels, have hard lives, all to keep a few spoiled brats like some of the commentators fed and watered. These are human being you are talking about. You have not ‘walked in their shoes.’ Try putting yourselves in their places.

      1. “Try putting yourself in their places.”
        Their “places” are outside the United States. And yes I’ll pay the extra fifty cents for celery.

        1. Mespo,
          It is intersinting that in scanning these comments, I’ve seen some stressing the need for illegal immigrants, apparently without considering legal migrant labor as an option.

          1. Again, whenever you state a ‘need’, you have an implicit purpose in mind. Why do you have that purpose?

            1. Absurd,
              The purpose is often to get people who are willing, experienced people who are willing to work their asses off.I’ve lived most of my life in an areas with a lot of different types of agriculture. The 1,000 or 10,000 acre wheat ranches are not as labor intensive as some of the 10 or 20 acre truck gardens, or orchards.
              I’ve done some work in those fields ( literally), and migrant labor has been used for generations… far back as I can remember, to the 1950s or 1960s.
              There have been some different procedures in attaempts to cut down a bit on the need for labir, but crops like strawberries, cherries, apples, onions, asparagus, etc. still require a lot of labor. Families with 5 or 8 or 10 kids were not uncommon a couple of generations ago, but shrinking family size means few “farm hands” to pitch in.
              Another factor in child labor laws in some jurisdictions. In some areas, busses would pick up kids as young as 9 or 10 to pick strawberries, or maybe help out around orchards. So both the decreased family size and restrictions due to child labor laws are factors in increased reliance on migrant labor.
              I think there was a big boost in the need for migrant labor during WWII, for obvious reasons. A tight labor market like we’ve had in recent years is another factor.
              At tge other end of the labor skill spectrum, one I’m less familiar with, it seems that there is a shortage of qualified citizens in sone fields of engineering and other advanced technical fields. I haven’t looked at the numbers for a long time, but when the mmajority of degrees are granted in the social sciences, or the humanities, etc., that points to an area that is “over-served” and fields that are underserved.
              The need for migrant/ non-citizen labor is due to multiple factors, and that need has been there for generations.

                1. “Again, what is the market telling you?”

                  Maybe the question is what are the non market forces telling you? The marketplace I envision is one where there is a level playing field. Illegals change the nature of marketplace. Illegal low salaries, illegal non payment of taxes, illegal use of social services. All of that leads to a market distortion and that creates other difficulties.

                  1. What the market is telling you is that you need to raise wages, change your production methods, switch crops, or sell land.

                    1. Why are the wages so low, DSS? Laws are being broken and community services given away for free.

                      As I have said before we could increase wages, increase technology, permit temporary legal workers ( We import a lot of nurses from the Philippines because we don’t have an adequate supply. Should we tear down the hospitals and create apple farms?), and reevaluate land use.

                    2. Yes, the market would drive those changes, as long as there wasn’t an enormous pool of illegal alien workers willing to work for less than the going rate.

                      Illegal aliens depress wages. They have driven many companies out of business who refuse to employ illegals. If you follow the law, are permitted, and follow building codes, then you get underbid by people who run unskilled illegal alien crews under the table. Then, sometimes, the reputable companies have to get called in to clean up the mess.

              1. Picking strawberries is sure backbreaking work, even with the raised rows.

                You are right – we’ve long had guest worker visas.

                That’s the thing right there. A responsible immigration system would be managed. Accepted numbers would be adjustable based on need. Do we need more STEM this year? More agricultural workers another? Are we looking at H1B visas this year?

                The flow, and type, is supposed to be managed based on what the country needs. There are something like 324 million people here in the US, and 7 billion in the world. We don’t have room for everyone, and if we threw open the borders, there would go our Western laws towards equality for women, etc. They’d be voted away because most of the world does not share our views. We also have no moral compulsion to turn the United States into a Coruscant, built out to the very inch, with no more farmland or open space, and not enough food and water. This has to be managed or it’s a free for all.

          2. Tom, ‘who’ are these legal immigrants you think are willing to do all the work that undocumented laborers are currently doing? Farmers currently have trouble finding even undocumented workers. That was the point of that article I posted about the farm sector; even at good wages, workers are hard to find. So I can’t figure out ‘who’ you think is available.

            1. Tom, ‘who’ are these legal immigrants you think are willing to do all the work that undocumented laborers are currently doing?

              The growers will either (1) raise wages to attract the necessary labor; (2) automate more; (3) switch crops; or (4) sell land to those seeking non-agricultural uses for it.

              This isn’t that difficult, Peter.

            2. Peter,
              To be honest, I don’t know their names. Probably a little if then are named Gonzalez or Rodriguez or Garcia, etc.😉
              Migrants are coming here for work, especially certain kinds of work. That is obvious. I don’t believe that only “illegals” are willing to come to the U.S. to perform work, and that may be a point that we disagree on.

              1. should be “a lot of them are named Gonzales” etc
                This new “smart”phone has some features I still have not figured out how to disable.

                1. Tom, it’s clear you don’t know ‘who’ would do that work.

                  That article I posted yesterday notes that even at $15 per hour, farm laborers aren’t necessarily easy to find. Yet you would have us think there are thousands of ‘legal immigrants’ eager for those jobs. You just can’t articulate ‘who’ they might be.

                  1. im here in flyover and whether it’s bigger scale production of grains in Illinois iowa or indiana, or smaller production of stuff like cherries and blueberries in michigan, $15 an hour will darn sure hire any amount of unskilled labor needed. the hiring rate is not $15 an hour, not close. It’s like $ 9-10 / hr here for new hires in the rust belt, for teenager level labor, which is mostly the sort of thing that migrants provide.

                    I am betting blueberry pickers, which in fact often do have lawful visas to work, usually make less.

        2. And that 50 cents would go towards higher wages for workers in better conditions.

      2. Savage,
        Legal migrant workers can fill need position. I don’t think survival of agriculture, for example, would be hurt if work was performed by migrants who came here legally.
        The emphasis for some here in these comments has been on how much we need illegal immigrants; migrant workers need not be illegals to fill jobs where the industry is dependent on “imported” labor.
        “Legal migrants” can work, too.

        1. Again, if you need to import labor to have a commercially viable crop, that’s a market signal that you need to automate or you need to be growing something else. Ditto crops reliant on subsidized water and subsidized credit.

                1. Nothing I said is inaccurate. If you have a complaint about a specific point, let’s hear it.

                  1. “Again, if you need to import labor to have a commercially viable crop, that’s a market signal that you need to automate or you need to be growing something else.”

                    We need to import nurses to have a viable medical system. As I said earlier should we plow up hospitals and build apple farms? There is nothing wrong with importing temporary labor if the playing field is kept level.

          1. Absurd,
            I’ve worked in small “truck gardens”, where 5-10 acres of onions, for example, can provide a good living. ( Prices can swing, substantially, of course, so that’s not true every year. In some cases, what you’re suggesting might be “doable”..
            But you can’t reasonably expect a 5 acre onion truck gardens to grow wheat instead……in many years, they’d be lucky to break even. Nor can you expect buyers to be lining up for all of these places.
            And a 10-20 orchard with apples, cherries, peaches as crops can’t to be expected to plow up hundreds of trees and a just plant something else.

            1. My suggestion, Tom, is that you raise wages. If you don’t have apples at a salable price at those wages, consider alternative harvesting methods with machinery. If that’s not feasible, switch crops or sell the land.

              And a 10-20 orchard with apples, cherries, peaches as crops can’t to be expected to plow up hundreds of trees and a just plant something else.

              They’re not making a living with it. I expect them to sell the orchard to someone who wants an ornamental hobby orchard, or, yes, plough the trees up.

            2. Tom – there are some interesting developments in monoculture. Vast amounts of monoculture are the most efficient, but they are extremely vulnerable to pests. Mixing up crops renders them less vulnerable, but also less efficient and more difficult to harvest with machinery. We might always need large farms, but those smaller acreages are also arks in case there is some bad harvest years. They can grow more varieties, and preserve genes that have been lost to monoculture. One day, there might evolve a pathogen that wipes out the few strains of wheat grown today in commercial farms, but the smaller acreages would hopefully have preserved some genetic diversity.

              This brings to mind when I used to live next to a farm that grew peppers as one of its crops. I wasn’t allowed to ride too close to the field due to health restrictions – contamination with E coli if my horse pooped. But even at the distance where I was, a breeze could blow the essential oil, heavy in capsaicin, onto the trail. My God, it was so bad for my vulnerable lungs. I have no idea how workers harvest peppers, and don’t recall seeing them wear any masks.

              What kind of crops did you work with?

          2. it’s a market signal, yes I would agree with that

            but not a solely determinative signal. not for national agricultural planning which may necessarily indicate a certain amount of autarky at least in food supplies. nor for a business, which actually can secure lawful imported labor

            as for subsidized water and credit, if you are in national competition with a lot of other producer markets that do the same, that would be a “signal” that maybe it’s necessary

            perhaps not for fancy cheese, but for more important foodstuffs like grains or staple vegetables, working inside a subsidized system may not be that big of a deal.

            the point is well taken for some locations however. perhaps production of some crops in dry california at taxpayer expense is very stupid and unnecessary. or so i have heard.

          3. When enough businesses use illegal labor, then others follow suit or they get underbid. That’s happened to one industry after another here in CA.

            In order to justify higher produce costs, they have to offer something different, like organic produce. Even then, when enough organic farms employ illegal labor, then the ones paying more for legal workers cannot compete.

            Until and unless the flood of illegal immigrants shuts off, it’s hard for farmers to compete with higher paid workers. Everyone else just undercuts them, and shoppers just buy the cheapest stuff.

            That said, there is a niche market for wealthy Whole Food shoppers for food grown “ethically” and “fair wage workers.” Even that would eventually be undercut with illegals willing to work for the lowest possible “fair wage”, which would still be cheaper with illegals who enjoy zero of the required benefits for legal workers. If a company advertised that it never hired illegal aliens to these Whole Food shoppers, they would immediately be branded racists.

            I agree with you that market forces will work, but the foundational requirement is for the supply of illegals to stop.

      3. Natasha is absolutely right.

        Natacha is a purveyor of emotional spew. One doesn’t make factual determinations about emotional spew. Emotional spew tells you something about the spewer, not about the wider world.

        This country couldn’t function without the help of the ‘illegals.’

        The ‘illegals’ constitute at most 3% of the labor force and tend to do low-order work. You can readily substitute for them by recruiting labor from the pool on the margins of the labor force, automating, or shifting production to other goods.

      4. Savage – if all of the illegal aliens here were suddenly taken up on a spaceship, would America dissolve? Would we go back to the Stone Age? Would we sit here, hungry, whining that there were not untouchable caste available to harvest or clean our houses or mow our lawns? Because if we’ve become that helpless, then we’ve got bigger problems than illegal immigration.

        There are work visas, where returning home is enforced, that address unfilled jobs.

        Do you realize that you are using the exact same arguments that Democrats used in support of Slavery? Who will pick our food? Our cotton?

        The answer is not to create an untouchable caste of workers who enjoy exactly zero of the costly benefits that people keep voting for, and how are exposed to more toxins than the average legal resident or citizen. No kidding they are human beings. Have you ever learned about what illegal aliens suffer at the hands of their cartel smugglers? What they suffer in the workplace because Democrats want their one-step-above slave labor again?

        There is no excuse for funneling billions of dollars annually into cartels, which creates more violence. No excuse for the rape trail here. No excuse for the poor working conditions of illegal aliens. No excuse for the wage depression that hits our poor the hardest.

        If you care about human beings, then demand all immigration be legal, which would ensure that everyone enjoys the benefits that have been voted for over the years. It would also ensure we have the infrastructure to care for the poor, and perhaps do something about the Walking Dead homeless staggering around, addicted or mad, and living in Third World conditions right here in the US.

      5. Savage:

        “We all like fresh vegetables at good prices.” Cheap vegetables means that the workers are not paid very much, or have good working conditions. Gas taxes raise the cost of produce, and it doesn’t benefit anyone. But if workers were paid better, and had safer work environments, then the increase cost of food directly helped someone.

        I once toured a banana packing facility in the Caribbean. The workers were completely covered with circular growths of skin fungus. They were spraying the bananas with anti-fungals prior to shipping, which led to anti-fungal-resistant skin infections. Those cheap bananas were obtained at the cost of the health of the workers.

        I never bought a conventional banana again, and only buy organic ones. I don’t want to contribute to health problems in farm workers.

        If you want to put yourself in an illegal immigrant’s shoes, then go shadow them in a field sprayed with pesticides and herbicides known to be neurotoxins. I live in Southern California. I have known, and been friends with, a great many illegal aliens. I can oppose the system of illegal immigration without having any negative feelings towards the people. I don’t blame them in the slightest. They’ve been encouraged to come here illegally by our policies. But I know their working conditions, and it’s not right. I know what happens when they come over here. I know the good guys, and I know about the illegal alien gangs. I’ve lived in a couple of areas over the years where there’s a gang presence composed mainly of illegal aliens. I’ve also known Middle Eastern illegal aliens. I don’t have to actually be an illegal alien to know many of the inherent problems.

        1. Cheap clothes mean sweatshops, such as the one where the factory collapsed and killed all those workers.

          The math goes like this : price of the product minus retail markup minus wholesale cost minus cost of materials minus profit to manufacturer minus cost of manufacturing equipment and building cost = wages to garment workers.

          Similar math applies to agriculture.

          Cheap goods = poorly paid workers. Is that the system you want to rally for?

          1. Karen, there is a balance. Pick a low labor skill in India where the treatment of labor would be considered dispicable. Now end the need for that labor. The question is what will happen to those laborers? Will they starve to death?

            1. India really does have a caste of untouchables, Dalit. Their plight is very sad. Take, for example, the children of untouchables who root through the US’s electronic waste for valuable parts. They get exposed to toxins like mercury. I would not want these working conditions to continue, even though it means they would not have access to toxic waste as a means of making a pittance.

              There have to be options for the poor to make a living. There has to be laws in place that protect individuals, for instance, that would have protected these children from an unsafe working environment.

              India is a different case because they don’t have the same individual rights as America. But I am interested in improving the lives of the poor wherever they live. The problem with the untouchables in India is that there is little upward mobility. There was a famous case of one becoming president Ram Nath Kovind. I think there have been two now. Things might be changing. But right now, this caste is exposed to the most unsafe conditions, and they never get anywhere.

              Here in the US, if illegal immigration dried up, it would raise wages. The lowest, most unskilled workers, legally here, would end up making moor, because, as you’ve pointed out earlier, there wouldn’t be a pool of illegals willing to take less and undercut them.

              Apropos of your comments about the Indian caste system is this video of Colleena Shakti, who embedded in an Indian village to learn the dances passed down through generations. One of my favorite American born dancers who actually was as talented as a native born. Usually American women just look awkward dancing to Middle Eastern or Indian styles. Or they do something silly like make happy faces when the lyrics are actually melancholy.

              1. Karen, I look for balance. In 1945 much of the war was starving and the US provided food and essentials for a part of that world. Since that time the US economy has soared as has its standard of living. In the process the rest of the world has benefited greatly and accepted capitalistic ideas which has added to the world’s standard of living.

                Thus, one of the things the US can do is continue to add to its standard of living and hope the rest of the world follows. Much of it already does and we see a lot of the world no longer cut off from communication and in largest population, China, starvation is no longer its main problem.

                We can lead by example and by increasing the creation of goods and drugs utilizeable by the poorest of nations. Americans are very charitable, much more so than our European allies.

                1. That is a good point.

                  I do wish that America was appreciated. We spend enormous amounts of money on environmental programs and foreign aid, including medicine and food, for example. Meanwhile, Libs would have the youngest generation believe we’re vile.

  9. JT: “This is not a call for wholesale prosecutions but, rather, for some clear semblance of continuity and consistency in our policies.”

    Without wholesale prosecutions nothing changes.

  10. Trump took on the Chamber of Commerce today for its anti-consumerism.. He’s no shill.


    Title 8 U.S.C. § 1324a(a)(1)(A) makes it unlawful for any person or other entity to hire, recruit, or refer for a fee, for employment in the United States an alien knowing the alien is an unauthorized alien, as defined in subsection 1324a(h)(3).

    Subsection 1324a(2) makes it unlawful for any person or entity, after hiring an alien for employment, to continue to employ the alien in the United States knowing the alien is or has become an unauthorized alien with respect to such employment.

    Subsection 1324a(f) provides that any person or entity that engages in a “pattern or practice” of violations of subsection (a)(1)(A) or (a)(2) shall be fined not more than $3000 for each unauthorized alien with respect to whom such a violation occurs, imprisoned for not more than six months for the entire pattern or practice, or both. The legislative history indicates that “a pattern or practice” of violations is to be given a commonsense rather than overly technical meaning, and must evidence regular, repeated and intentional activities, but does not include isolated, sporadic or accidental acts. H.R.Rep. No. 99-682, Part 3, 99th Cong., 2d Sess. (1986), p. 59. See 8 C.F.R. § 274a.1(k).A scheme for civil enforcement of the requirements of § 1324a through injunctions and monetary penalties is set forth in § 1324a(e) and § 1324a(f)(2).

    In addition, 18 U.S.C. § 1546(b) makes it a felony offense to use a false identification document, or misuse a real one, for the purpose of satisfying the employment verification provisions in 8 U.S.C. § 1324a(b).

    [cited in Criminal Resource Manual 1907; JM 9-73.100]

    they must PROVE to the jury a “pattern or practice” for the lesser charge, and then they must PROVE knowledge, for the bigger charge.

    the fines are small. so the case is hard, and the payoff is small. Federal prosecutors are always busy with serious crimes of violence and the rest of the bad things and comparatively speaking anybody should be able to understand why they don’t want to spend a lot of time on hard cases with small payoffs, when there is a lot of more lower hanging fruit out there to be had.

    1. proving “knowledge” of such things is not easy. especially when the standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. people who have never had to plead and try a fraud case may not really appreciate how hard it can be for a lawyer to succeed at such a case.

      that’s why smart criminals almost always gravitate, towards fraud for bigger payoffs and lower risks. this is old jailhouse wisdom

      here is a fiction book that describes various schemes of fraud and extortion

      there is a systemic tension between capitalism and fraud, because the lines can be blurry. and we want to punish fraud, without banning “mere sales puffery” which is a quotidian element of marketing and advertising

      in the HR area, employment records verification is a system that could be made more rigorous but the left does not want it for good civil liberties reasons, and the right does not want it because it would make the hiring process even more laborious than it is, and they want to preserve what economists call the virtue of “labor market flexibility”

      1. MK,

        The issue of IDs & the handling of personal data is completely out of control & has been for some time.

        There’s been a push to bring in E verify. sounds good until one stops & thinks about

        At the founding of the US there wasn’t a commie SSI number now I think everyone has
        GD bar code stamped on our azzes.

        Back in the late 1700s there was very little info the fed/state gov had on the citizens.

        Immigration, census, mailing address, registering for the draft, etc..

        Now we also have govt’s , I believe, violating everyone’s Rights, like the 4th, 5th etc., by asking for or buying our private info from 3rd parties…

        Banks, Med Records, social media, etc..

        I not sure if it’s part of the Everify, but Okla & a few other states have rejected the Feds call for mandatory national ID.

        So if I or other Okies don’t voluntary change our IDs by this fall I think, we/I won’t be able to fly on a plane in the US.

        Mind you this is will the TSA is illegal searching Americas, having women remove their tampons, etc., meanwhile the Fed Gov is allowing/paying for disease carrying 3rd world Sholers to fly all over the US.

        I’ve know this but I see in the news feeds today Muellers coup team was using Trumps team members phones to track them.

        The point is that the Fed/State govs, Corporations are taking almost No security measure to keep our personal data private.

        Hell even the Fed admits it’s sharing All of our info with 5 eyes intel groups, UK, Oz, New Z, Germany, France……

        Anyway I & others have thought some time that there should only be State Ids, but with an expectable national standards. Like a photo ID, etc….

        Don’t worry though, it’s very unlikely bad people will hack you’re banking info

        & go to stealing money out of your acct or that they would use people’s cell phone to track them down & kill them which is starting to appear that way the last week or with the latest of the Clinton Body Count.

        So far an Arkie,& an Okie,, 2 NYPD, Hillary’s brother. I could be wrong, but with the Clintons… LOL

  12. Let me get this straight.

    Mexico’s new president has open, anti-American sentiment. Mexico helps massive caravans of illegal immigrants cross its country in order to storm our border wall and demand entry, passing country after country along the way. Sometimes these border clashes leads to the invaders throwing large rocks at the heads of Border Patrol agents.

    And then Mexico thinks it is entitled to generous trade deals that favor them? Do I have that right?

    If Mexico wants a trade relationship of a good neighbor, then it needs to act like one.

    That said, don’t start a trade war unless you are certain you can win it, and you temporarily compensate American businesses that hurt in the process.

    The hordes of illegal immigrants swarming our borders are a shame and a blight on the Democrats in Congress who permit it.

    1. Karen

      You are either very uninformed or else intentionally wrong. BOTH major parties do the bidding of the ruling class who WANT MORE illegals.

      I think you probably know that too.

      1. BMc,

        Go do some research from some real news sources.

        This country has already been almost completely overran.

        Ck Infowars/show, TheLibertyDaily, etc.

        Cloward-Piven strategy – Wikipedia
        [Search domain–Piven_strategy]–Piven_strategy
        The Cloward-Piven strategy is a political strategy outlined in 1966 by American sociologists and political activists Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven that called for overloading the U.S. public welfare system in order to precipitate a crisis that would lead to a replacement of the welfare system with a socialist system of “a guaranteed annual income and thus an end to poverty”.

      2. Only one party is pushing the sanctuary states, free drivers licenses, abolish ICE, etc.

        I’m not saying that businesses don’t profit from the nearly slave labor of illegals. I’m saying that this is a heavily lopsided issue along party lines, with Democrats putting all they’ve got into fighting border security and enabling illegal immigration.

        If you think that Republicans are creating sanctuary cities and want to abolish ICE, on a par with Democrats, then you are lying to yourself. And that’s a bad thing.

    2. Karen, border security is controlled by the executive branch, as are negotiations with foreign countries. Obviously the president doesn’t know how to do either.

      1. migration and citizenship and work permit laws are passed by Congress. the bureaucracy makes rules. the president enforces them. it’s a team effort, anon

        1. Kurtz, we agree it’s a team effort, but beyond the fact that you could have made the same objection to Karen’s post, if the executive branch is having trouble performing it’s duties, it can either change it’s procedures within existing laws or cooperate and help lead Congress – by virtue of it’s experience on the front lines – to new legislation.

          Trump has not effectively handled problems at the border, which have grown worse on his watch, nor has he tried to construct with Congress a serious and comprehensive plan for addressing immigration. A wall which will take years to build is not an answer to an emergency and he has rejected at least two possible compromises with Congress – that’s how it works in our government – including one ushered to him by Lindsey Graham when the House was still Republican. If you think he has a plan, I’d like to hear it. If you think he’s exhausted his available tools, as a reasonable person, i’d assume you agree he has primary responsibility for asking for more.

          Trump doesn’t want a solution as a crisis on our border motivates his base – see this forum for proof – unless it’s his wall so he can declare victory.

          1. Anon was banned yet again after Darren deleted many of her comments. Yet here she is once again like an STD that refuses to go away

            1. Estovir, the Democrats are using biological warfare against the American people.

              Tuberculosis Back in the U.S.; Obama, Illegals to Blame

              “By the 1960s, tuberculosis (TB) had been almost totally eradicated in the United States. But 50 years later, according to a March 20 Reuters article, “Half a million people fell sick with dangerous superbug strains of TB in 2012 …The culprit? A massive unregulated flow of lawbreakers crossing our southern border from Mexico and Latin America has led to a resurgence of fatal airborne diseases like TB that attack the lungs.”


              …And from the CDC:

              Preventing and Controlling Tuberculosis Along the U.S.-Mexico Border


              Take not the CDC recognizes that drug resistant Tb comes from accross our southern border.

          2. Such BS from such an ignorant person. The Democrats are responsible for most of the immigration problems at the border and the drugs as well. We are now starting to hear that much of the funding for these immigrants travelling from Central America starts in the US. Good chance we will find Democrats behind the funding.

      2. Law enforcement must comply with ICE detainers.

        How would you like it if they held a suspected terrorist, and let him go without holding him for the feds? Make sense to you?

      3. Anon – child pornography is a federal crime. Think local law enforcement would comply with a detainer for a pedophile?

        1. Karen, there are several problems with police complying with ICE requests having nothing to do with sanctuary cities:

          1. Added work load for stretched police forces. Unless there is an arrest order based on a crime, just being illegal is low priority and low risk.
          2. Immigrant populations will hesitate to report or cooperate with police for fear of triggering arrest or deportation of friends, relatives, or themselves.
          3. Legal restraints on identity requirements.

          Where I live, which is not a sanctuary city, the police do not fully comply with ICE requests based on those reasons.

          1. Cops do not report immigration status of witnesses or victims of crimes in order to prevent people in danger of deportation from coming forward. I have no problem with that.

            However, cooperating with an ICE detainer for an arrestee is different, as is reporting the immigration status of a detainee. One of the bare minimum requirements against illegal immigration is to deport criminals. Sanctuary cities protect criminals from deportation. That’s not a paperwork issue. Leaders clearly state it is a political position.

            You really should do more research on this. There have been prominent cases in the news here for people who were supposed to be deported, but were in a sanctuary city, and instead raped or killed again.

            1. Karen, you should do more research. I don’t live in or within 1000 miles of a sanctuary city but the policy I outlined above is the policy of our local police.

    3. My God you are delusional. Trump threatened the “trade war” because it is a way for him to get attention, to get away with pushing people around without Congress’s approval, and to appear powerful, all part of his malignant narcissism. Tariffs are a dumb idea which Republicans oppose because it will hurt American businesses more in the long-run. Most American automobiles depend on components manufactured in Mexico. We do not have the resources to gear up production to replace these parts on this side of the border, and the cost would be higher if that eventually happens because we pay a living wage here, so the cost of automobiles and replacement parts will go up commensurate with the amount of the tariff or increase in the cost of production. That will slow car sales. That’s just one example. We are way more dependent on Mexico that Trump realizes, but the tariff threat was about his ego, not about economic policy.

      To be clear, Mexico’s President has an open anti-Trump sentiment, like most Americans, or most inhabitants of Planet Earth, for that matter. That’s not the same as anti-American sentiment. Wanna know why he dislikes Trump? Because he called Mexicans “rapists”, “criminals” and “drug dealers”. Does Trump expect them to kiss is broad butt after insulting them? Does a “good neighbor” insult your people and then expect you to do their bidding? Yes, Mexico did hire air-conditioned buses to help transport the South Americans to our borders, to push back against Trump, but for humanitarian reasons, too. These hordes of people are coming because they think that the hammer against any possibility of ever emigrating to American is about to be dropped, due to Trump’s instability and lack of any consistent policy. The “coyotes” who help them get here tell them this.

      Trump is the cause of the “hordes of illegals swarming our borders” because he refuses to take action against employers who hire them. Take away the incentive to hire illegals. If the jobs dry up, they won’t come here, but Republicans don’t want illegal immigration to stop. Democrats are not the cause of the problem. Republicans and Trump are.

      1. Natacha:

        “Trump threatened the “trade war” because it is a way for him to get attention.” When you make an assertion like that, submit supporting evidence. Prove that Trump threatened tariffs clearly stating it would be done unless Mexico helps curb the invading caravans, etc, only it wasn’t really about illegal immigration, one of his campaign promises, but rather about some ambiguous need for “attention.”

        You will notice that most of my posts contain links, usually from several sources along the Left and Right, along with quotes where applicable.

        You have also been told, repeatedly, with links to video evidence, that Trump did not call all Mexicans rapists and murderers. There were two comments, both heavily edited, to appeal to the gullible. In one, they cut out that he said that some are good people, along with criminals. In another, he was expressly referencing MS-13.

        I have provided evidence in the past that Mexican cartels now run the illegal immigration smuggling operation, earning billions, which are used for more illegal activities like gun running. So, no, those are not good people.

        You can’t take action against employers until you seal the border and take action against individuals, as well as dry up all the pulls behind illegal immigration – no more health benefits (like CA), or scholarships, or in-state tuition, or low cost auto insurance, or any of the other myriad ways in which the Democratic Party enables and entices illegal immigration. Otherwise, you’re unfairly targeting employers.

        1. 1. It’s not possible to “seal” a 2,000 mile border. Are we supposed to post guards 24-7 10-ft apart? Not possible. 2. most illegals don’t come here for health benefits, scholarships, in-state tuition rates or anything other than jobs. Republicans mostly control the jobs. 3. I’ve seen the video where Trump called Mexicans “rapists” and “criminals’. There was no editing done. He then added “some I assume are good people”. He did not qualify what he said that most were rapists and criminals. That’s a Kellyanne spin. He wasn’t referring to MS-13, either. They tried to clean up what he said later on once his handlers realized how bad this sounded, just like the dishonest attempt to put a spin on the “good people” comment about the Charlottesville White Supremacists. We saw and heard it. No do-over. Democrats do not enable or entice illegals to come here because most big businesses are Republican-owned.

          What “evidence” would convince you that Trump is a narcissist, and that his personality disorder drives what he does? Haven’t you seen the comments by Republicans that they would openly oppose him if he proceeded with imposing the tariffs? No, of course not. I know better. You watch Faux News. They probably didn’t tell you that Mexico doesn’t have the military resources to stop illegals or to house and feed 100K per month, either.

          1. during the chiapas rebellion the mexican military found plenty of bullets and shovels to seal the border in dense jungle area.

            they can do it again

          2. Natacha – please post supporting evidence for your assertions so that they may be debated properly.

            For instance, “Republicans control jobs” based on what? Apple is a Democrat leaning company.

            If you saw the video, unedited, then you heard him say they send good people, too. He talked about the US being a “dumping ground for everyone else’s problems.” If you don’t know about the drug and gun and human trafficking, then you need to look it up. If you don’t know about the illegal immigrant gangs, then you need to look it up. These are real problems, and facts don’t care if it’s PC. Illegal immigration is run by the cartels who often rape women and girls along the way. It mixes in nice people with the bad, and there is no way to strain out the bad guys and only let in the good, because they refuse to go through the process.

            It is also problematic that other countries’ problems are not getting solved at home. Instead, people leave them, come here, and then start voting for similar policies to what caused their problems back home. For instance, voting for more and more benefits which became unsustainable in their origin country. On the one hand, voting with your feet sends a message. But on the other hand, nothing is getting fixed. Those who want change, leave, and then nothing ever changes. Thorny problem.

            Illegal immigrants are all people who refuse to go through the legal system, with its background checks, and they pay $15,000, $20,000, and often more to avoid our legal system. There are myriad sources from both the Left and the Right that discuss how much they pay, and it’s more than the legal system would cost, which is only $325 for the interview, $255 for the medical exam, and $725 to apply for naturalization.


            I have posted the transcript of the “fine people” comment. If you insist that he called racists “fine people” then you are lying to yourself. That’s a bad thing to do. I have included the part where he said racists should be totally condemned, and he was specifically not talking about them. I have used bullet points to explain the 4 groups who were there. For you to repeat what you now know to be misinformation is dishonest. What happened to critical thinking in America?

          3. “When you make an assertion like that, submit supporting evidence.” I asked for evidence that the threatened tariff was for attention, rather than to combat illegal immigration.

            You have provided none, which indicates that you know this was a biased opinion, and not a fact.

            It is irresponsible to falsely claim that a President, and Republicans, merely want attention rather than a fix to illegal immigration.

            Impossible to properly guard a border?

            —–Hypothetical Thought Exercise—–

            Hollywood proved eerily prophetic, and a virus created a real life Walking Dead in Latin America. Highly infectious people with a deadly disease that manifests as dementia and violent tendencies start crossing the border. Transmission – bite. Mortality – 100% after 14 days. Transmission Rate – 1 victim infects, on average 100 more.

            Do you think America could figure out a way to control the border then? Or would we all be doomed? Would this totally unsolvable problem suddenly be simple?

            You can change this hypothetical to a GoT theme with a Long Night and White Walkers if you choose. Maybe throw in a dragon or two.

            1. Don’t make me laugh, Karen. There isn’t enough time in the world for people with real lives to respond to some of the nutty(and biased) comments on this little blog. This is not a debate forum; it’s the “comments section” of a blog where where very few people comment and there doesn’t appear to be much diversity. No one is required to “submit supporting evidence.”

              1. “Don’t make me laugh, Karen. There isn’t enough time in the world for people with real lives to respond to some of the nutty(and biased) comments on this little blog.”

                As this was in response to my reminder to post evidence, I assume, then, that you have none? And are therefore trying to find an excuse. What you’re saying, then, is that there is absolutely no evidence to come to a conclusion that Trump threatened a tariff just for attention, rather than for border security, and that this was just a falsehood put out there for political purposes? Again?

                This answer is revealing.

                It doesn’t matter if it’s a blog post or a casual conversation. It’s like walking up to someone and saying that a woman we’ll call Beth is a total liar. Why, the person asks. What has she done? My God, you don’t know?! If I had to tell you then you really are ignorant! And you flounce off, having revealed yourself as a malicious gossip of falsehoods, not to be trusted.

      2. Trump makes illegals swim the river? Oh wow you really are imagining things. totally unmoored from reality

  13. The stock market effect. It’s going up & down

    For those of you who have Stocks, mutual funds, IRA’s, 401k’S & pension plans.

    Don’t sell when Trump tweets. I had paper losses near $140,000 in 2018 then it recovered. With the Mexico threat in 2019, I had paper losses close to $20,000 then it recovered.

    1. Jerry.
      I hope you meant 2008😉…..if you had those kinds of losses in 2018, you’d better have somebody else pick your stocks or funds.
      If somebody else was already doing that, I’d fire them.

  14. “there is a striking disconnect between the level of enforcement directed at undocumented individuals as opposed to employers of undocumented persons.”

    It shows Professor Turley that you have never been a working owner of a business. Congress is permitting sanctuary cities, illegals to remain, and and all sorts of vagaries that makes it difficult for certain businesses to survive. To include employers then e-verify and non citizen work permits need to be granted so that everyone working could at least have non permanent work permits. Without that the effects of such enforcement would be unequally applied and gamed with a resultant loss of businesses and loss of jobs. It is easy to look from afar at how businesses should act when close up Congress does nothing.

    It is not up to Businesses to make the determination of a person’s right to work if those persons come in with false documents and the government does nothing to provide documents that can easily be used by all businesses. If 10% of the workforce in California is illegal then we are relying on illegal persons to keep certain industries afloat. The solution is easy and doesn’t involve granting citizenship to illegals ahead of those following the law and waiting years for entry to the US. It involves work permits and removing people that do not have them or no longer have a job. At that point the employer could gradually be used to pay for the social costs of those working in the US.

    1. the only I-9 form he ever filled out was his own most likely

      but turley’s a good chap, don’t be too hard on him. we’re guests

      1. Turley is a great guy who I admire but am frustrated with when he forgets that there is a whole world around him that doesn’t live in an ivory tower and has live in a world where illegal activity occurs all the time.

  15. How about enforcing the international rule that requires asylum seekers to stop in the first safe country they reach? How about passing legislation that says a person in the country illegally will not be eligible for any federal benefits at all? How about actually enforcing e-verify?

  16. We don’t enforce immigration laws against employers because Congress understands that enforcement would be disastrous in certain industries, particularly agriculture. That is why Congress has refused to make everify mandatory. Albeit it cowardly and immoral, it is much easier to demonize undocumented people while simultaneously permitting their exploitation. After all, they have no ability to protect themselves and serve as convenient political fodder for bigots and xenophobes. A little reading of the history of immigration policy in this country reflects a simple truth: undocumented workers are both necessary and economically powerless, and we like it that way.

    1. It’s just kicking the can down the road, using the same arguments that Democrats used to use in favor of slavery.

      Illegal immigrants are the untouchable caste who do the dirty jobs. Illegal immigration allows this caste system to perpetuate.

      If our country cannot figure out how to mow lawns or pick vegetables without illegal immigrants, then maybe the country is too lazy to perpetuate. Industry has become dependent upon illegal labor because it flooded the country and was readily available. If the border was, and always had been, secure, then industries would never have become co-dependent on law breakers.

      Some countries have natural borders that are more difficult to breach than our open deserts, such as islands or mountain ranges. Somehow, they manage to survive.

      If our citizens have lost the urge to work, then I suppose we could always adjust the guest worker program, and become more proficient at making sure they leave on time.

      Geez, we evolved to build fire, combat the Little Ice Age, and fend off smilodons. Congress thinks we can’t figure out a solution to line jumpers?

    2. “undocumented workers are both necessary”

      Why? Because Congress isn’t doing its job and can’t pass an appropriate immigration law or provide legal work permits? Don’t get confused, workers may be necessary but undocumented ones are foolhardy.

      I’m sure we could find a policy that is fair and that we both agree on. Mike, want to give it a try?

      1. Congress has offered two deals to Trump – one by Lindsay Graham as leader and another from Chuck and Nancy – but Trump was unable to ,ake a deal and walked away with nothing. In 2013 a bipartisan comprehensive immigration bill passed the Senate but Boehner refused to let it come to the floor under the Hastert rule – it would have passed and Obama would have signed it.

        1. Anon,did Trump veto one of those bills? No? Then it wasn’t Trump rather it was Congress.

          The emergency immigration problem is simple to solve. All illegal immigrants can be returned unless seeking asylum from a neighboring country. No if’s and’s or but’s. All other assylum claims will not be considered valid unless made at an American Embassy or Consulate. No Anchor babies.

          This would probably require a single page and would be signed by Trump immediately. Stop with the BS.

    1. To be fair, all arrows in the quiver to fight illegal immigration must be used simultaneously, otherwise one side bears more burden than the other.

      eVerify compliance audits and enforcement, border fencing, border patrol, removals of those inside, cooperation of law enforcement with ICE detainers, reporting of immigration status, no more lures such as drivers licenses, cheap auto insurance, scholarships, or Section 8 housing for illegal immigrants…

      In addition, we need to address the common problem of anchor babies. It’s not just Latin Americans who travel here heavily pregnant to give birth, and sometimes die in the desert. It is common for Chinese and Russian pregnant women to travel here legally on a visa, and then give birth to an anchor baby in order to stay, and then do chain migration of the whole family left behind.

      This was supposed to make slaves legal citizens, not be a loophole in our immigration laws that is gender biased.

      I am very sympathetic to children who were brought here by their parents when young. They did nothing wrong. However, legalizing them encourages more parents to illegally immigrate with vulnerable young children to use as leverage to get around our legal immigration system.

      If, and only if, we solidify border security and shut down illegal immigration to a mere trickle, then I would be amenable to giving some sort of legal status to the Dreamers. But not until.

      I also would like to point out that it’s unfair to blame illegal immigrants. Our policies invite them here. Is there any more clear beacon to illegal immigration than sanctuary cities and scholarships for illegals? It’s not their fault that they take us up on it.

  17. Policy is the product of legislation, and Congress has all Legislative authority, granted by Article 1 Section 1 of the Constitution! So where in the Constitution does it grant the President the authority to make or influence policy, Foreign or Domestic, which supersedes the authority of Congress?

    The President is not even included in any negotiations over Policy! Oops, there goes your Coequal Branch theory!

    For those of you who still don’t understand, the President can only veto legislation for cause, and must state the cause when the legislation is returned to Congress for reconsideration. Sorry, just not liking it because it doesn’t suit his agenda, does not constitute proper cause and Congress need not consider the President’s Veto as valid! If the President doesn’t like them apples, maybe Impeachment for failure to properly execute the office of President would be more to his taste!

    1. ICE is charged with, and able to, criminally prosecute employers. Decisions as to that agency’s priorities are within the purview of the executive branch. It would would not take legislative action to enforce the existing criminal law.

      1. There are so many misconceptions and out right inaccuracies in your statement to deal with in one comment!

        There is nothing the Executive Branch can do without the Advice and Consent of Congress, the United States, in Congress Assembled!

        If they don’t understand what Congress intended by a law, it is the President’s responsibility to consult congress for clarification then write an Executive Order which is communicated to the Executive Department which is responsible for implementing that Law.

        The Union Governs our Country, Not The President, and Definitely Not Parties!

  18. When someone crosses the border illegally they violate a law. How many laws are violated when someone hires an illegal? Just wondering.

    1. 8 U.S. Code § 1324a. Unlawful employment of aliens This section of the Federal Code deals with unlawful employment but, frankly, it’s an cup of weak tea considering all the noise the GOP is making about illegal immigration.

      Corporations love illegal immigration because they can kick Americans out of jobs; drop pay or avoid paying altogether and they can abuse their workers. If the workers talk back they call ICE! There have been reported instances wherein big and I do mean big, used teams of illegal immigrant to do certain jobs and when those tasks were completed and before the workers were paid, ICE was called in to pick all the workers up. That is how American business conducts itself to day.

      1. I would add that companies sometimes feel pressure to hire illegal immigrants in order to compete.

        Californians vote for one expensive labor cost increase after another, but when it comes time to hire a nanny, a landscaper, home remodeler, builder, car detailer, etc, what do they do? They pick the lowest bid, which is typically submitted by someone who runs illegal alien crews. They get paid under the table, do not pay income taxes, and enjoy none of the protections the voters chose. They are often not licensed, untrained, and unaware of building codes. When comparing the bid of an experienced, legal, compliant business and one with totally untrained illegal aliens, the homeowner is often outraged at the “price gouging” of the former.

        You see, voters are very free with other people’s money, but stingy with their own.

        1. Also, one of the most common crimes committed by illegal aliens is identity theft.

      2. Opinion Without fact is rightly treated in one way… REJECTED.

        We used to put it this way.

        There are four groups who want open immigration’

        Statists for the assumed increase in votes
        Corporatists who want inexpensive labor
        Labor Leaders who want more dues.

        Are those who want their 99 cent burgers back and don’t like emptying garbage.

        The first three define the make up of the socialist fascists as first described by Mussolini when he was the leader of the Italian Socialist Party Large F Fascism came next but the three are the socialist triumverate

        The last are those that want their tail gate parties and cheap enough gas to attend. them.

        Source? Observation.

        None of them are Constitutionalists.

Comments are closed.