Comments: Regulation Isn't Free

I'll find the link to my own post later, but I've said for a while now that there's no point to the law distinguishing between one man as a "legal resident" and another man as an illegal alien. The difference is whether one works and the other leeches via the state.

I don't care if the Guatemalans in Brewster (a town in the county north of me that's known for an increasing Hispanic population) are living here legally or illegally. In warmer weather, there are usually a bunch on the Metro-North train by the time it gets to my stop. I don't care why they're riding it, which is always for day-labor jobs in Mount Kisco or Chappaqua. I *do* care if they're living off my tax dollars.

Conservatives often use "the rule of law" but have no goddamn idea what it means. It only means that the law must be applied equally to everyone. It doesn't mean the law must always be obeyed: there have been laws saying you'd lose your head for not swearing allegiance to the crown, so should those have been enforced? What about when HillaryCare is passed, must it be enforced because "it's the law"?

Laws can be wrong, and just because an illegal "broke the law" doesn't inherently mean anything bad.

Posted by Perry Eidelbus at December 14, 2007 4:39 PM

I'd love to see the link if you can dig it up, Perry. I'm a lonely voice around here on immigration. (Then again, I'm feeling a bit lonesome on "New Monitarism" as well...)

Posted by jk at December 14, 2007 6:44 PM