In order to have any type of conversation we have to agree on a fundamental plane. The United States is a sovereign nation, with borders. The citizens of the country through their elected representatives get to choose who gets to stay in that country, assuming they were not born there. Put simply, there is no God-given right for anyone to live in any country outside of the laws that the country sets.
And here we already have a problem. Fundamentally there are a group of people who believe that people should be able to live wherever they want… Unless of course the local jurisdiction wants to build housing in their neighborhood, then it's Katy bar the door.
To be clear this issue has not been dealt with in a real matter by Republicans and Democrats alike. Both seeking to use the issue for political gain although the GOP has turned that into an Olympic level sport recently. This has left the President of the United States with the unenviable position of having to do something, and regardless of what he chooses to do he will be attacked for it.
In a striking display of detachment from the practical realities of American politics, a coalition of over 150 progressive organizations recently launched a fervent appeal to President Joe Biden, urging him to reject a series of executive actions aimed at managing the surging migration crisis at the southern border.
Despite the escalating pressures at the border and the clear need for a pragmatic overhaul of the outdated immigration system, these groups remain steadfast in their ideology, promoting an open-border policy that is increasingly untenable. Their letter to the White House, decrying potential policies such as an asylum ban for migrants entering between official U.S. ports of entry, illustrates a profound misalignment with the complex dynamics of modern migration and the bipartisan consensus necessary for substantive policy reform. We cannot have one group of people presenting themselves at ports of entry, and then hundreds of thousands of others just coming across the Rio Grande because they can. That is simply unmanageable and unsustainable.
This insistence on maintaining a hardline stance against any measure perceived as a compromise not only undermines the potential for meaningful dialogue and solution-finding but also isolates these progressive factions from the broader political discourse. It signals a worrying trend of prioritizing ideological purity over the urgent need for actionable, sustainable solutions to one of the most pressing issues facing the nation.
Furthermore, the Biden administration's contemplation of these executive actions, born out of a failed bipartisan effort in the Senate and the pressing need for enhanced border security and immigration reform, highlights the pragmatic challenges of governance. The administration's struggle to balance its early commitments with the realities of an intractable Congress and a deteriorating situation at the border underscores the complexities of immigration policy—a realm where idealistic aspirations often collide with pragmatic necessities.
Put simply, we cannot save every puppy in the pound. What is happening at the southern border is heartbreaking, and certainly there is more we can do. But we need to stop the flow. So-called "sanctuary cities" had no problem using migrants as political pawns when they wagged their fingers at red states and righteously called themselves a sanctuary city… Until they were faced with the reality of hundreds of thousands of migrants depleting resources. Now they're waving the white flag.
This is the difference between activism and governance.