Could Anti-Immigrant Bloggers Be Any More Ignorant?

Last week, in a post about right-wingers having one of their trademark fainting spells over a minor aside made by Homeland Security chief Janet Napolitano while discussing immigration enforcement, I pointed out that they were wrong on the facts and Napolitano had been correct: being in this country without papers is a civil violation, not a crime (frankly, I'm not sure why this matters, but they take these things really seriously).

I made clear that entering the country illegally is a crime (a federal misdemeanor for a first offense, and a felony for subsequent violations). But Napolitano had been correct, if unnecessarily vague, in saying that many immigration violations were "civil," because "crossing a border isn't a crime per se." What she should have spelled out more clearly was that many unauthorized immigrants -- as many as half -- entered the country legally and then overstayed their visas. Doing so doesn't violate any criminal statute, but it can get you deported. This is fairly straightforward.

Enter the blog 24 Ahead, with a post entitled, "Seth Hoy /IPC, Joshua Holland outrageously mislead about Napolitano border comments." If you define "outrageously misleading" as getting the basic facts of U.S. immigration law straight, then the anonymous blogger ar 24 Ahead is correct. Otherwise, not so much.

Here's 24 Ahead doing what right-wing bloggers excel at: inserting foot into mouth ...

Perhaps Holland would then like to explain this 2008 ICE press release:

FT. SMITH, Ark - One hundred and twenty-three illegal aliens were processed here for removal between December 2007 and January 2008 by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's (ICE's) designated Immigration Criminal Apprehension Taskforce (ICAT) in Northwest Arkansas... Most of the individuals encountered had entered the United States illegally, without inspection, and found themselves in police custody for various legal violations... The taskforce worked with the U. S. District Court for the Western District of Arkansas to prosecute seven individuals for illegally re-entering the United States after being deported and one additional individual for entering the United States without inspection... [an illegal alien] who was charged with one count of entry without inspection...

In other words, their continued presence was a crime for which they were prosecuted.

No, 24 Ahead, in the words you just quoted, ICE prosecuted a number of immigrants for "entering the United States illegally," "illegally re-entering the United States," and "entering the United States without inspection." Exactly what I said were criminal violations in the original post.

My God, these people are dense.

Now, I've noticed a few equally dazzling legal minds of the right weigh in on this, and many seem to think that the fact that we detain and deport people who are here without papers is proof that the hardliners' long-standing wish -- making it a crime -- had secretly come true (attempts to criminalize those in the country without valid documents were shot down in Congress in 2005). These folks have difficulty grasping the fact that ICE picks up plenty of people who are guilty only of a civil violation -- and that doesn't make it a criminal act.

So let me recap, really slowly for the anti-immigrant bloggers:

The United States has both a criminal code, and an administrative (or civil) code.

Being in the U.S. without papers is a civil violation, not a crime.

Entering the country illegally -- evading a border checkpoint, not showing valid papers, etc. -- is a violation of the criminal code. First violation is a misdemeanor, subsequent violations can be charged as felonies.

This is not complicated or controversial.