Sure, provided they go back to where they came from and apply from there. There have been laws and rules in place in this nation, and since before its founding, that require a person to go through the proper channels to enter into our society, why should that be changed because some people have refused to do so?
No no way at all, further they should be rounded up and shipped out using military personal if man power is needed.
If they can prove that there were here before a certain date, they should be given a pathway to citizenship. The rest should be sent back.
Well, that was sort of the point of the question...there are no channels (the so-called "pathway") for those who are already here and have overstayed a visa or came "illegally". - - - Updated - - - Utilizing the military domestically to enforce civil laws is not allowed by the US Constitution.
Those that overstayed their visa do have legal channels as they can still apply to adjust status, they are considered out-of-status. Only an EWI has no legal means to adjust status. That pretty much cuts the illegal immigration total of 11M in half, roughly 5 - 6 Million are EWI and should return or be returned to their homelands. A VO can go through the channels, but if denied, should also return or be returned.
Well, that is basically the current state of the law. I believe the biggest part of the problem is that the country has not allocated the funds or manpower necessary to accomplish removal of those who have entered without inspection. So maybe the better question is...should we allocate untold amounts of money and resources to enforce what are essentially civil violations of the law or would it be more efficient and cost-effective to allow these folks an easier pathway to citizenship?
Sure. But manning a post at the border is much different than "rounding up" undocumented immigrants (who could hardly be accurately characterized as an "invading force") who are spread from coast to coast in cities and towns. That was the suggestion to which I was referring.
You mean illegals? I'm in favor of them using the legal method instead of skipping in line in front of all the people who are actually going through the legal procedure.
The country allocates every year an amount, the issue being we are overwhelmed and are limiting ourselves right now to remove just 390K per year. EWI is not a civil violation of the law. EWI is actually a criminal violation, VO is an immigration infraction. Would it not be easier and cheaper to allocate larger funds for a short time, say 3 - 5 years to rid ourselves of illegals at which point our local economies are better off since they are the ones taking on the brunt of the illegal immigrants costs. After that time frame, go back to a lesser and smaller allocation and return EWI's immediately. Over a 10 year time frame, or even less, it would be better cost effectiveness to just rid ourselves of them to where if they are allowed to continue to remain or even granted a path to citizenship, they then become low income and are entitled to entitlements that end up costing us even more. What makes you believe they are or should be entitled to a path to citizenship?
No not undocumented. The people before have always immigrated legally they need to abide by the same rule.
It's advisable a certain caution in this field, and I suggest to US authority just caution [I won't vote in the pole, I'm not American]. A minimum level of legality should be required before of starting the process to get the citizenship of any country by undocumented immigrants. Excess of liberality can be even dangerous in this international context.
