Illegal Immigration

From Joseph Smith’s “Views of the Powers and Policy of the Government of the United States,” which summarized his political position when he was running for president:

“As to the contiguous territories to the United States, wisdom would direct no tangling alliance. . . and if Texas petitions Congress to be adopted among the sons of liberty, give her the right hand of fellowship, and refuse not the same friendly grip to Canada and Mexico . . . And when a neighboring realm petitioned to join the union of liberty's sons, my voice would be, Come--yea, come, Texas; come Mexico, come Canada; and come, all the world: let us be brethren, let us be one great family, and let there be a universal peace” (HC 6:206, 208-09, emphasis added).

A few years back, I was driving a friend of mine, an undocumented immigrant, home from a church activity. We were talking about immigration. He said, “Marshall, you’re lucky you’re white.” He’s right. I am lucky I’m white, and I’m lucky I’m American. But it shouldn’t be that way. I don’t know why I am entitled to so much more than someone born across the dotted line as determined by the prenatal lottery, or the “accident of one’s birth or race,” as Booker T. Washington called it. I don’t see why I’m entitled to more than those born into a country that is currently being ravaged by drug lords, gangs, kingpins and weapons dealers; who furthermore, may be unable to wade through the mountain of paperwork, have the finances or lack the education to pass an equivalency exam established by the American bureaucracy explicitly to make it extraordinarily difficult for one to gain "legal" entry into America.

I know quite a number of undocumented immigrants. I know them as hard-working, determined, grateful, loving, faithful people. I have heard them talk about their time walking through the steaming hot and icy cold Arizona desert with a prayer in their heart and guided by the Spirit. I have seen doctors and lawyers from Latin America working as house cleaners and painters in the United States in order to give their children a better education and a safer future.

These people bring us a rich culture. I have come to love their language, traditions, cuisine, and values. They value family, respect, love, compassion, work, and wholesome recreational activities.

And I have seen these families torn apart by hateful laws. Laws like Utah’s SB81 and Arizona’s SB1070 (not to mention other policies Arizona is implementing). For the purposes of this post, I will focus on SB1070. And as a disclaimer, I do realize that illegal immigration is a real issue that needs real answers. I simply don't think that this kind of bill is the right kind of solution.

I think this law hurts the Church, has no gospel foundation, tears apart families, and I disagree with many specific elements in the bill, as illustrated below.

The Church. This law will impede missionary work. It will give the Church negative associations because of the LDS legislator (Russell Pearce, R-Mesa) who sponsored the bill, and attempted to support it with his faith. The Church, under direction of the First Presidency, has addressed this issue, and they clearly are against such radical legislation. Considering the thousands of members here without legal status—including missionaries, branch presidents, bishops, and stake presidents—it is no surprise the Church takes the stand it does. How can anyone (to say nothing of a Mormon) feel that tearing a father away from his family is anything but reprehensible? We have a great deal of that in our own Mormon history, another reason it shocks me that this issue is so divisive. Sadly, this Mormon Arizona senator doesn't want to stop there.

The Gospel. Pearce sought to support his bill with Church doctrine, but I argue that Church doctrine does much more to defy the bill than support it. First of all, I've often found the "law of the land" corollary particularly weak. There was a time not so long ago when a Western country's leadership made it illegal to shelter a Jew. Closer to home we have our friend, Jim Crow. And closer still, in the 1830s there was a law enacted in Missouri making it legal to kill a Mormon (only repealed in 1978). The law can be a terrible agent for injustice when wielded by the wrong hands. It all depends on which side of it you happen to fall.

It is against our theology to turn away anyone for any reason. We can begin by looking at the God’s most basic law, the Law of Moses, that commands the Israelites to provide for strangers (in a time when boundaries, land, and laws were just as important as they are now) (Deuteronomy 24:19-21). The Lord also commands the Israelites to “love ye therefore the stranger: for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt” (Deuteronomy 10:19). And, incidentally, some translations, such as the NIV’s refer to these “strangers” as “foreigners.” The parallels between Americans and the Israels are clear. Christ’s higher teachings remind us that He is the stranger that needs peace and prosperity: “I was a stranger and ye took me in . . . inasmuch as ye have done it unto the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me” (Matthew 25:35, 40). He warns the Nephites that He will be a “swift witness . . . against those that . . . turn aside the stranger” (3 Nephi 24:5). Shortly after Alma established the Church, Mormon notes that “in their prosperous circumstances, they did not send away any . . . having no respect of persons as to those who stood in need” (Alma 1:30, emphasis added). And the Anti-Nephi-Lehites were commanded of the Lord to cross boundaries, enjoy the resources of their former enemies, and receive protection from them (Alma 27:12, 23). Nowhere in scripture does it talk about throwing them out of the country or tearing their families apart because of man made laws. Where much is given much is required (D&C 82:3). And we, as Americans, have been given much. We are only meant to have riches and abundance if we can bless others with them (Jacob 2:19).

While on that note, it is important to remember the role immigrants play in the last days. The Savior talked about this not once, but three times to the Nephites before leaving them (3 Nephi 16:13-15, 20:16-22, 21:12-24). I don’t know exactly how the remnant of the Jacob (the people of Latin America) will “tread down” and “tear to pieces” the Gentiles, but I know that I want to be on their side, because they are on the Lord’s side and they will build the New Jerusalem (3 Nephi 21:23-25). We will be blessed to be in their company and should learn to get along with them here and now.

The Bill. The following addresses specific parts of the bill with which I disagree.

Federal vs. State Authority. This is a federal issue. Lines 40-45 on page 1 of the bill give rights to police officers and federal agents to exchange information. This will keep the role of the police from fulfilling their duties. It will heighten fear and crime among immigrant populations and even those associated with immigrants. Ironically, the bill refers to law enforcement officers as “peace officers.” Breaking families apart, racial profiling, making people afraid to report crime and scaring people into hiding sounds like anything but peaceful to me, and certainly is not promoting the “universal peace” Joseph Smith sought. It’s no wonder some police officers are refusing to adhere to it, and others are speaking out against it.

Racial Profiling. One of the worst parts about this bill is the risk of the aforementioned racial profiling. Police officers have the authority to apprehend anyone “where reasonable suspicion exists that the person is an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States” (Page 1, Lines 20-26). A friend passed onto me a message that he received from a friend who lives in Arizona. This SB1070 supporter has said to have had undocumented immigrant neighbors who have too many people living in their home and stay up all night partying. She also saw some purported undocumented immigrants in front of her in a grocery store, speaking Spanish and using food stamps. This person, while arguing on behalf of SB1070, gave evidence of the very concern the bill’s opposition continues to address: racial profiling. Like my friend astutely noted, I’m lucky I’m white. Even if I were here illegally, running an underground drugring, and made a habit of stealing identities and benefits from the American people, I would be safer than a brown man working his life out to provide for his family. There is certainly cause to believe the profiling that will accompany this law violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Undocumented Criminals. Now the bill does talk about deporting those who have broken state or local law (Page 1, Lines 27-31). This is reasonable, mostly. If they are dangerous to our society, it makes sense to deport them. I would argue that the SB1070 should stipulate what crimes are cause for deportation. It’s one thing to speed and another to commit murder.

Undocumented Employees. The bill cracks down on undocumented immigrants who even “apply for work” (Page 5, Lines 14-17). It goes on to talk about what happens to employers, a process that is much more lenient and much more complicated. It’s do-and-die for the immigrant, but the employer has second chances. If anyone should be penalized, it should be the employers.

Transporting Undocumented Immigrants. The bill (along with SB81) puts any at risk who “transport or move or attempt to move an alien . . . who has entered or remains in the United States in violation of the law” (Page 5, Lines 29-34). That would be me. Many times. When I served as the Young Men’s President of a Hispanic ward in Salt Lake, I drove undocumented immigrants to and from activities at least weekly. I would take them to service activities, campouts, counseling with LDS Family Services, etc. So beware, any serving or working with the Latino population, including nonprofit volunteers, church leaders, and employers. I would owe Arizona thousands of dollars for those youth activities.

Civil Rights. I found it amusing that the end of the bill states that it will be implemented “in a manner consistent with federal regulating immigration, protecting the civil rights of all persons” (Page 16, Lines 22-24). I suppose that means those excluded from the “persons” category include undocumented people, and Hispanic people in general (at least those not “lucky” enough to be white). Sad.

The majority of the American people seem to be in favor of this bill, thereby losing sight of the core ideological foundation on which America was built. Huddled masses, there is no room at the inn.

Richard Marshall contributed to this post.