BYH to these elected officials who are paid by our tax dollars naming buildings after them, i.e. Butterfield, Owen's to...

How to enforce borders without separating kids


Ramesh Ponnuru


Wednesday, June 20, 2018

President Donald Trump and his top aides have given America two main stories about the separation of families at our southern border: It's an unfortunate byproduct of laws and court decisions that tie the administration's hand, and it's a necessary deterrent to illegal immigration. These are conflicting accounts. If the administration believes the first one, it should welcome legislation to keep families together. If the second reflects its thinking, it should reject such legislation for undermining a valuable tool against illegal immigration.

Officials have not gone out of their way to clarify the issues.

Take, for example, Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen's recent comment: "We do not have a policy of separating families at the border. Period." Based on previous remarks she has made about the policy, what she appears to mean is that the administration is not separating families on purpose but doing it because it's what happens when you prosecute parents for crossing our borders illegally.

It's a defense of the administration that ignores three salient points. First, the policy of prosecuting all illegal border crossers as criminals — what the administration is calling "zero tolerance" — was a choice of this administration. Previous administrations considered it and rejected it. Second, it was chosen even though one of its predictable effects was to take many more children from their parents. That's a major reason it was previously rejected.

Third, at least some high-ranking officials favor the separation of families as a way to discourage illegal immigration. The White House chief of staff, John Kelly, told CNN in March 2017 that he was considering separating families as a deterrent. Attorney General Jeff Sessions has done his part to amplify the deterrent message: "If you don't want your child separated, then don't bring them across the border illegally."

Deterrence is a valid purpose of the law, but it has moral limits. Sessions would not, I trust, endorse executing the children of illegal immigrants to deter others from crossing. He would see the perversity of a statement like "If you don't want your child executed, don't bring him across the border illegally." The deterrent he is defending, while less severe than that, also crosses the moral line. It places much of its burden on children. To the extent it works as a deterrent, it does so precisely by harming them. That's why even in the Trump administration, very few people are willing to defend it on these grounds.

Nielsen wants Congress to amend the law to allow illegal border crossing to be prosecuted as a crime while keeping families together - which, presumably, would mean letting families be detained together for as long as it takes to see their cases through, and providing funding both to build facilities in which they can be humanely detained and to speed up their cases. Her implicit view is that zero tolerance without family separation is better than zero tolerance with family separation, but zero tolerance with family separation is better than what we had in place before this year.

Her view is defensible only if a small and uncertain reduction in illegal immigration is worth tearing apart families. But it too clashes with the sound moral instincts of most Americans. Maybe that's why she doesn't state it openly.

An alternative policy would have three parts. The administration would stop enforcing its zero tolerance policy on adults traveling with children until it got changes in the law that enabled the humane detention of families. It would advance those changes in the law as a stand-alone measure rather than using legislators' desire to keep children with their parents as leverage to win other immigration-related policy changes. And it would, separately, push for legislative changes that enabled other means of enforcing the immigration laws, such as punishing businesses whose new hires are illegal immigrants.

Really, though, these three steps boil down to one: Just don't split up families when it's not absolutely necessary. Among the advantages of this simple alternative is that the administration would find it easier to keep track of its storyline.

Ramesh Ponnuru is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist, a senior editor at National Review, visiting fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and contributor to CBS News.


Humans of Greenville


Local photographer Joe Pellegrino explores Greenville to create a photographic census of its people.

Op Ed

November 21, 2018 - 17 minutes ago

If Democrats are trying to reassure anyone that they won't impeach President Trump, they are not doing a very good job of it.

Just days after her party won control of the House, Rep. Nancy Pelosi made clear that Democrats might impeach the president even if Trump-Russia special counsel Robert…

Byron York

November 21, 2018 - 17 minutes ago

Despite the manufactured panic of the migrant caravan, the midterm's so-called "referendum on Trump," the nation's nonsensical gun laws, and an election that often seemed a direct rebuke of misogynist GOP leaders and policies, the pollsters told us the 2018 election would begin and end with health…

Billy Ball

November 21, 2018 - 17 minutes ago

Recent hurricanes Florence and Michael, and the damage to our coastal region, highlight two things: Sea level rise and unequal distribution of wealth.

Unfortunately, both of these are political as well as scientific. The current hyper-partisan atmosphere for discussing solutions is toxic and…


November 21, 2018 - 17 minutes ago

Much of today's incivility and contempt for personal liberty has its roots on college campuses, and most of the uncivil and contemptuous are people with college backgrounds. Let's look at a few highly publicized recent examples of incivility and attacks on free speech.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch…

Walter Williams

November 20, 2018

Voters handed the leadership faction in North Carolina’s General Assembly a couple of black eyes this month.

First, two proposed constitutional amendments — which would have turned court appointments and the elections board, essentially, over to whoever’s running the legislature…

November 20, 2018

Disappointed after the midterm elections, Republicans are trying to decide which voters should be the party's top priority.

In recent elections, they have been losing votes from white college graduates, often in the suburbs, while gaining votes from whites without college degrees. Should…


November 20, 2018

I've got a confession to make: Back in 2006, I didn't vote.

It's not that I didn't want to. I'm one of those people who feels strongly that it's a basic duty of citizenship to vote in every election. I judge people who don't vote.

My excuse was that I was a UNC-Chapel Hill student still registered…

Colin Campbell

November 19, 2018

A false alarm in a North Carolina school this month was a sober warning all the same: Serious gun-law reform in this nation is long overdue.

Preliminary news reports suggested a school shooting could be in progress at Topsail High School north of Wilmington.

At around 6:30 a.m. Friday morning,…

November 19, 2018

VIENNA, AUSTRIA — Democracy is on the wane, even in this land of happy soft-spoken people; even in this broad boulevard, tree-lined city steeped in the ubiquitous strains of Strauss and Mozart.

They like most of the democratic people’s of the world have taken their democratic lead from…


November 19, 2018

Not that it is really in my interest to say this, but many of our political debates are a waste of time.

They may well be about important issues. But they go nowhere. The two different “sides” disagree strenuously without making a real effort to understand what their foes are saying.


john hood.jpg
309 stories in Op Ed. Viewing 1 through 10.
«First Page   «Previous Page        
Page 1 of 31
        Next Page»   Last Page»