The simple truth is that the repercussions of illegal immigration can be detrimental to our country. When dealing with this issue, we must keep our national self-interests in mind.
But is it fair to punish existing, albeit illegal immigrants who have already made a living in the United States? Even if they are using our resources or adding a financial burden on our society, they are also the ones who clean our bathrooms and pick our vegetables in hot, dreary fields. Losing these undocumented immigrants means losing a substantial part of our labor force.
In this country, we treat illegal immigrants with a double standard. Since they provide cheap labor, they are almost encouraged to enter the country the back door. American businesses know how convenient it is to use immigrants, and moreover, they know how detrimental it would be to lose their skill and work ethic.
Recently, an Alabama immigration law has shown the consequences of our double standard when it comes to undocumented workers. Alabama's law is not progressive.
In general, the law demands that state and local law enforcement officers attempt to validate a person's immigration status when said person is pulled over for a routine stop or traffic violation. Just like a criminal investigation, if the officer has "reasonable suspicion" that the individual is an illegal immigrant, he or she has the right to demand federal immigration papers.
There are several important concerns that must be addressed. First, what experience do Alabama state and local law enforcement officers have in determining whether someone may be an illegal immigrant? The concept of reasonable suspicion is such a contested, complex and open-ended legal issue in criminal court that I cannot imagine how difficult it would be to apply the standard to alleged immigrants.
Reasonable suspicion is understandably used in circumstances of obvious offenses, such as determining whether someone has drugs in their car. A police officer is trained to observe the individuals' behavior, facial expressions, etc.
The only way for an officer of the law to be reasonably suspicious that someone is an illegal immigrant is to use judgment void of any physical evidence - judgment perhaps based solely on the color of one's skin. This is the definition of racial profiling.
Second, Alabama's immigration law requires that elementary and secondary schools verify students' immigration status before admitting them into the school. There is one legal dilemma that stands out clearly here: It is unlawful to deter students from enrolling into a school. Even if this wasn't a question of legality, it is unfortunate that the education sector is once again victimized. Essentially, Alabama is denying children the right to pursue an education. In turn, children who do not attend school like the rest of their friends will be stigmatized and labeled, which can often negatively influence a child's self-awareness and can often lead to many forms of criminal behavior. Alabama should find another way. Demoralizing immigrants is not the answer.
Third, just like during the segregation period in our history, there will soon be a divide between immigrants and non-immigrants. Is it moral to use an undocumented worker's labor, dictate their lifestyle and fire and hire them as we please but then get rid of them because we happen to be in an economic recession?
It is understandable that Alabama wants to address the illegal immigration issue, but its recent law may bring about broader, long-term problems.
Akansha Mishra is a pre-law junior at UF. Her column appears on Fridays.
