# What would be the best way to expel illegals and start over with legal immigration? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 9, 2006, 5:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-be-the-best-way-to-expel-illegals-and-start-over-with-legal-immigration/351926 "2006-04-09T05:12:38Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2006, 8:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-be-the-best-way-to-expel-illegals-and-start-over-with-legal-immigration/351926/81 "2006-04-10T20:46:41Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Raising the cost of doing business will just tempt employers even more to hire illegals and save a buck. But now because you’re raised the cost of doing business, the employers will be willing to pay illegals more than they have been, because they would be paying less than they would for legal workers. So the disparity between the illegal wage a person could get here and what he could get in a country like Mexico becomes greater. And the greater that disparity, the stronger the lure of those higher paying jobs in the U.S. I don’t think so. If employers are offering decent jobs at decent wages, **legal** workers will want those jobs, and hiring practices will be scrutinized more carefully. At present, there’s a huge lack of oversight on sweatshop-type work simply because most workers don’t consider those jobs worth competing for. Yes, the key is enforcement on the employment side. And if we start by properly enforcing labor law for all jobs, then we have legal workers actively contributing to enforcement efforts because they don’t want their jobs degraded. ---
**Author:** ![DMC](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dmc/32/18049_2.png) [@DMC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DMC)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2006, 9:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-be-the-best-way-to-expel-illegals-and-start-over-with-legal-immigration/351926/82 "2006-04-10T21:16:40Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Let the translators be supplied by advocacy groups. We do not have an official language, but we should. And I venture to say that what is happening now will, thankfully, re-energize [the movement](http://www.us-english.org/inc/) to do so. [This page](http://www.us-english.org/inc/official/fact%5Fsheets/db_multiling.asp) speaks to the financial costs. Do you have any links that don’t have anything to do with Rushton or Tanton? Just one? ---
**Author:** ![DMC](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dmc/32/18049_2.png) [@DMC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DMC)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2006, 9:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-be-the-best-way-to-expel-illegals-and-start-over-with-legal-immigration/351926/83 "2006-04-10T21:25:50Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > And wouldn’t you say that “getting along” means respecting each other’s rules, boundaries and laws? I’m sure that if there was some hot sweltering day in Ashville and you had a cool, delicious-looking pool, that I might really, really, really, really want to take a dip in that pool. And why not, it’s right there? So I’l just go get my towel, out it out on a lounge chair, maybe bring a book, and dive right in. > > No problem, right. And hey, what’s that I see through the window, a nice big refrigerator. I bet there’s some nice cool drinks in there? Maybe I’ll just walk in a take a look. Great, Snapple Peach Ic ed Tea. I’ll just leacve a buck and a half and go back to my towel, book and heat up for another dip. Ahhhhhhhhhh. > > No problem, right? These are really crappy analogies. I personally have no problem with people using my pool, and would happily invite them to do so. For your analogy to even come close to fitting, one of my neighbors would have to want to override my wishes and keep them out of **my** pool. I’m not for illegal immigrants coming to America. I’d be much happier having people be able to come here legally if they wanted. America isn’t **your** pool, it’s **our** pool. It’s a pretty nice pool, and I am willing to share it with those who won’t piss in it. You aren’t. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2006, 9:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-be-the-best-way-to-expel-illegals-and-start-over-with-legal-immigration/351926/84 "2006-04-10T21:51:31Z")
> [@DMC](#): > > Do you have any links that don’t have anything to do with Rushton or Tanton? Just one? I know John Tanton (a racist, not to put too fine a point on it) is one of the founders of U.S. English. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John\_Tanton](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Tanton) But what does J. Philippe Rushton **(definitely** a racist, and a bad scientist to boot – [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippe\_Rushton](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippe_Rushton)) have to do with it? He’s not even an American, he’s Canadian. ---
**Author:** ![David\_Simmons](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9de053/32.png) [@David\_Simmons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_Simmons)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2006, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-be-the-best-way-to-expel-illegals-and-start-over-with-legal-immigration/351926/85 "2006-04-10T21:56:17Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > You asked how Reagan’s Amnesty Bill undid history. I explained that. Now you contort things by moving the clock forward so that the amnesty _is_ history. > > It helps in a discussion if the goalposts do not move. > > The logistics, make it difficlut, yes. The history can be construed any way you like. The facts? What facts are you alluding to that are not included in the logisics and the history? > > You think it foolish nonsense. Good for you. Very constructive debate fodder. The original question was how to get illegal immigrants out. MY answer is you can’t get 11 or 12 million people out. If you don’t like that answer, fine. Effort spent on formulating a plan to get all illegals out is wasted time. > [@](#): > > The main obstacle is a lack of will on behalf of the American people, and more specifically, our elected leaders. There has been an unhealthy alliance between the two parties for too long now, in which each was happy to not bring the issue to the fore, albeit for different reasons. 911and the Border Patrol guys have focused eyes on the issue and now it will not go away. The recent marches have made me ecstatic, as they have forced less engaged Americans to see the scope of the problem. The preponderance of Mexican flags and the American flag flown in distress (by the way, what a great way to show a love of a country you want to be a part of) will do more to create the will that we need than all the newspaper articles, magazine pieces, books, and message board debates could ever do. > > Please, MORE MARCHES. Some important obstacles are the southwestern US agricultural corporations and the agricultural trade associations plus those of the construction industry, various service industries like janitorial services, etc… Illegal immigrants are good for them as of labor that dare mot complain about unfair labor practices, sub-minumum wages, unsafe unsafe working conditions and the like. The failure to act over such a long period says a lot about who really calls the shots that politicians follow. ---
**Author:** ![crowmanyclouds](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crowmanyclouds/32/19884_2.png) [@crowmanyclouds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crowmanyclouds)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2006, 10:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-be-the-best-way-to-expel-illegals-and-start-over-with-legal-immigration/351926/86 "2006-04-10T22:26:45Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Let the translators be supplied by advocacy groups. We do not have an official language, but we should. And I venture to say that what is happening now will, thankfully, re-energize [the movement](http://www.us-english.org/inc/) to do so. [This page](http://www.us-english.org/inc/official/fact%5Fsheets/db_multiling.asp) speaks to the financial costs… From your cite, [http://www.us-english.org/inc/official/fact\_sheets/db\_multiling.asp](http://www.us-english.org/inc/official/fact%5Fsheets/db_multiling.asp) Fact Sheets: Costs of Multilingualism _“Alameda County (CA) Medical Center has 18 full-time interpreters on staff in addition to 19 on-call translators.”_ How are doctors supposed to treat patients who don’t speak English, “translators be supplied by advocacy groups”, and if you don’t have a group for your language? I know medical charades! Doctors will just love that! _“The Virginia Supreme Court has certification programs for Spanish court interpreters and is considering certification programs in Vietnamese and Korean.”_ Cool, lets get rid of court translators, I’ll commit my crimes with only non-English speakers as witnesses. No translator, no testimony, no conviction! _“The total cost of providing multilingual services for the Immigration and Naturalization Service would be between $114 million and $150 million annually.”_ Can’t see any reason INS would need non-English speakers! While we’re at it, how much money are we wasting on multilingual services in the State Dept. and the CIA? **magellan01** I’d still like you to address my question in post [#41](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=7282483&postcount=41) > [@David Simmons](#): > > The site’s reference to The Black Hills War states that the in agreement that finally ended that campaign the Black Hills were ceded to the United States. That seems to have nullified the Fort Laramie Treaty… Do you mean the [Wiki quote](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Hills#History)? [Here’s](http://www.argusleader.com/specialsections/2003/treaties/treaties_map.pdf) a pretty complete (though brief, better than Wiki) history of the treaty. (PDF) > [@David Simmons](#): > > …But that’s not the point. The point is that you can’t turn back the clock and entirely undo 30 or 40, or more, years of history merely by passing a law. Well, the SCotUS disagrees (almost, money but no land)! [ > [@](#): > > The case that was before the High Court was brought by the Oglala Sioux in July 1980, several weeks after the Supreme Court resolved an earlier lawsuit by awarding all eight Sioux tribes $105 million as compensation for the Federal Government’s seizure of the Black Hills through an act of Congress in 1877. > > The Indians had argued, and the Supreme Court agreed in an 8-to-1 decision, that the seizure of the 7.3 million acres was unconstitutional. In the Fort Laramie Treaty of 1868, the Federal Government made the Black Hills a permanent pa rt of the Great Sioux Reservation. But in 1874, an expedition headed by Lieut. Col. George A. Custer discovered gold in the Black Hills. Congress quickly changed its m ind and took the area back… > …The Oglala said they would not be bound by any monetary settlement and would be satisfied only by restoration of the land, which the Indians regard as sacred… ]([http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9405E2D81138F93AA25752C0A964948260&n=Top%2FNews%2FU.S.%2FU.S.%20States%2C%20Territories%20and%20Possessions%2FSouth%20Dakota](http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9405E2D81138F93AA25752C0A964948260&n=Top%2fNews%2fU%2eS%2e%2fU%2eS%2e%20States%2c%20Territories%20and%20Possessions%2fSouth%20Dakota)) [Link to the Case Preview](http://supreme.justia.com/us/448/371/) [Link to the Full Text of Case](http://supreme.justia.com/us/448/371/case.html) The story doesn’t end here, but I really don’t want to hijack **magellan01** ’s thread any more than I already have. CMC fnord! ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2006, 10:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-be-the-best-way-to-expel-illegals-and-start-over-with-legal-immigration/351926/87 "2006-04-10T22:42:35Z")
> [@DMC](#): > > Do you have any links that don’t have anything to do with Rushton or Tanton? Just one? Look, your little game of “oh that website is affiliated with so-and-so, and I don’t like so-and-so, therefore the information is tainted in some way” has become tiresome. Earlier, you objected the words of a fucking treaty because you didn’t like the website it resided on. (Which, by the way, I had just googled to find the wording.) You could have looked up the treaty and checked if the Article I supplied was accurate, but no, instead you just whine. Still, I went and provided another link to the treaty, which, of course, showed the exact same words. Before that it was an article on VDARE, that I did not even cite. And because of that one article you want to discount the whole website. Good for you. Knock yourself out. Oh, and FAIR, oh yeah, they’re racist, too. Anyone who disagrees with you is racist, glad to hear it. And now, you object to a website of an organisation that was started by Senator S.I. Hayakawa, because he started it with Tanton, who, of course, must be a racist. So does that make Hayakawa a racist too? And people like the esteemed Jacques Barzun, Saul Bellow, and James Schlessinger who sat on the board? It’s nice, neat little world you live where everyone who you disagree with can be written off as racist or some other term that allows real debate to cease. Nice. Very convenient. Newsflash: you and I are on oppositite sides of this and many issues. The cites I give will likely contain information that you don’t agree with. That site will probably have some link to other sites, groups, or individuals you disagree with, so here’s an idea, don’t click on them. Why should you? No doubt they will be from people or organisation you deem as racist. Or be tied, in some way to similar people or organizations. If you have nothing to offer, why not just stop typing? The contribution to the discussion will be the same and you could go march with the illegals. See? Everybody wins. When you’re done marching though, you might want to check out [this.](http://www.fallacyfiles.org/guiltbya.html) > [@DMC](#): > > These are really crappy analogies. I personally have no problem with people using my pool, and would happily invite them to do so. For your analogy to even come close to fitting, one of my neighbors would have to want to override my wishes and keep them out of my pool. I’m not for illegal immigrants coming to America. I’d be much happier having people be able to come here legally if they wanted. America isn’t your pool, it’s our pool. It’s a pretty nice pool, and I am willing to share it with those who won’t piss in it. You aren’t. I just hit preview and saw that you had supplied this brillaint analysis. It cause me to want to temper my response as this whole analogy/debate thing may be new to you. So, I’ll go slow. The pool is the U.S. The person wanting to swim in the pool would be a foreigner wanting to come to the U.S… Now that person has some options: 1. Ring your doorbell and ask you if it’s okay to take a swim. A request which you may or may not grant, for any reason you like. 2. Simply long to swim in your pool. In fact, he might find the idea so attractive that he figures out how to build one of his own. 3. Invite himself in and start swimming. Translated for the purposes of the analogy: 1. Seek permission to come to the U.S., apply for a visa, for instance. 2. Improve his own country so it more resembles what he finds attractive about the U.S. 3. Sneak into the U.S. (Or come here legally and then overstay his visa.) Are you following so far? I’ll continue by pointing out, specifically, the errors in logic you made in you analysis. > [@DMC](#): > > These are really crappy analogies. It’s one analogy. > [@DMC](#): > > I personally have no problem with people using my pool, and would happily invite them to do so. If you invited them, it wouldn’t fit the analogy. Can you not see that. And cannot you not see that although you personally wouldn’t mind anyone who feels like from coming to swim in you pool without permission, there are probably some people who would? > [@DMC](#): > > For your analogy to even come close to fitting, one of my neighbors would have to want to override my wishes and keep them out of my pool. Bingo. Let’s assume you’re not actually as benevolent as you profess and that your pool isn’t open willy-nilly to anyone who happens to see or learn about it. Then that person taking it upon himself to just come swim on property he has no right to be on without your permission is, thusly, expressing an override of your wishes to keep people you don’t know out of your pool. > [@DMC](#): > > I’m not for illegal immigrants coming to America. I’d be much happier having people be able to come here legally if they wanted. Great. But the question remains: what do you do when someone comes here illegally? Let’s say you redo all the immigration laws so it is very easy for people. many people, to come here legally. Surely, you would have some restriction, right, even it’s 50 million people a year. What do you do one more sneak in? > [@DMC](#): > > America isn’t your pool, it’s our pool. It’s a pretty nice pool, and I am willing to share it with those who won’t piss in it. You aren’t. I’m absolutely williing to share it. Anyone who comes here legally I welcome with open arms. But if you come into my pool against my wishes (U.S. immigration laws), you deserve nothing but the same contempt you have shown for my rules. Now if you are so intent in sharing what is yours with those who can’t come in legally, why don’t you work to have a family come and stay with you in your home? Serioulsy. I’m sure having a sponsor like you would improve their chances and speed things up. I hope that helps. ---
**Author:** ![David\_Simmons](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9de053/32.png) [@David\_Simmons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_Simmons)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2006, 10:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-be-the-best-way-to-expel-illegals-and-start-over-with-legal-immigration/351926/88 "2006-04-10T22:44:09Z")
> [@crowmanyclouds](#): > > Do you mean the [Wiki quote](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Hills#History)? [Here’s](http://www.argusleader.com/specialsections/2003/treaties/treaties_map.pdf) a pretty complete (though brief, better than Wiki) history of the treaty. (PDF)Well, the SCotUS disagrees (almost, money but no land)! > [ > [url=http://supreme.justia.com/us/448/371/]Link to the Case Preview](http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9405E2D81138F93AA25752C0A964948260&n=Top%2fNews%2fU%2eS%2e%2fU%2eS%2e%20States%2c%20Territories%20and%20Possessions%2fSouth%20Dakota) > [Link to the Full Text of Case](http://supreme.justia.com/us/448/371/case.html) > The story doesn’t end here, but I really don’t want to hijack **magellan01** ’s thread any more than I already have. > > CMC fnord! Damn. Nobody ever tells me anything. 😉 In any case, money compensation doesn’t restore the sacred Black Hills to those originally in possession . And money was given in compensation because it is for all practical purposes impossible to restore the \* status quo ante\* just as in the case with the illegal immigrants who have been here for years. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2006, 10:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-be-the-best-way-to-expel-illegals-and-start-over-with-legal-immigration/351926/89 "2006-04-10T22:48:06Z")
> [@David Simmons](#): > > The original question was how to get illegal immigrants out. MY answer is you can’t get 11 or 12 million people out. If you don’t like that answer, fine. > > Effort spent on formulating a plan to get all illegals out is wasted time. Fine. That’s your answer. But I asked in the OP that this not be about _whether_ we should oust illegals, but what the best way was. Regardless, we now have your answer. Thank you. > [@David Simmons](#): > > Some important obstacles are the southwestern US agricultural corporations and the agricultural trade associations plus those of the construction industry, various service industries like janitorial services, etc… Illegal immigrants are good for them as of labor that dare mot complain about unfair labor practices, sub-minumum wages, unsafe unsafe working conditions and the like. > > The failure to act over such a long period says a lot about who really calls the shots that politicians follow. You are 100% correct. I agree. But what point are you trying to make. Please see the OP, particularly step #1. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2006, 10:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-be-the-best-way-to-expel-illegals-and-start-over-with-legal-immigration/351926/90 "2006-04-10T22:54:59Z")
> [@crowmanyclouds](#): > > What exactly do you think those words mean? That the people were welcome to choose to stay and become citizens, but thet they would be expected to assimilate into the American culture (whatever it was at that time) and not hold on to the Mexican culture. It seems rather explicit, even if the term “culture” is inherently broad. How do you read it? Overall, I think the article expands on that very point,that these people who so choose would be granted all the rights and priveleges of citizenship. ---
**Author:** ![Unregistered\_Bull](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/3da27b/32.png) [@Unregistered\_Bull](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Unregistered_Bull)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2006, 10:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-be-the-best-way-to-expel-illegals-and-start-over-with-legal-immigration/351926/91 "2006-04-10T22:59:47Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > That the people were welcome to choose to stay and become citizens, but thet they would be expected to assimilate into the American culture (whatever it was at that time) and not hold on to the Mexican culture. It seems rather explicit, even if the term “culture” is inherently broad. > > How do you read it? > > Overall, I think the article expands on that very point,that these people who so choose would be granted all the rights and priveleges of citizenship. It is the right of citizenship to hold on to Mexican culture. Just like it is a right of US citizens to hate them for it. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2006, 11:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-be-the-best-way-to-expel-illegals-and-start-over-with-legal-immigration/351926/92 "2006-04-10T23:05:51Z")
> [@crowmanyclouds](#): > > How are doctors supposed to treat patients who don’t speak English, “translators be supplied by advocacy groups”, and if you don’t have a group for your language? I can think of no better reason to learn English quickly. Possibly, before you get here. > [@crowmanyclouds](#): > > Cool, lets get rid of court translators, I’ll commit my crimes with only non-English speakers as witnesses. I see no reason why the state may choose to hire translators in order to prosecute crimes. It is a vested state interest. Then, I guess the argument is that public defenders should have the same tool at their disposal. I’d probably have to agree with that. Good point. > [@crowmanyclouds](#): > > _“The total cost of providing multilingual services for the Immigration and Naturalization Service would be between $114 million and $150 million annually.”_ > > Can’t see any reason INS would need non-English speakers! > > While we’re at it, how much money are we wasting on multilingual services in the State Dept. and the CIA? Again, the state can do it because it is a tool to enforce laws and/or ensure national security. > [@crowmanyclouds](#): > > **magellan01** I’d still like you to address my question in post #4. I just did. Sorry I overlooked it. > [@crowmanyclouds](#): > > The story doesn’t end here, but I really don’t want to hijack **magellan01** ’s thread any more than I already have. Thank you. I appreciate it. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2006, 11:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-be-the-best-way-to-expel-illegals-and-start-over-with-legal-immigration/351926/93 "2006-04-10T23:07:48Z")
> [@Unregistered Bull](#): > > It is the right of citizenship to hold on to Mexican culture. Just like it is a right of US citizens to hate them for it. I was asked to interpret a passage from the treaty. Read it and tell me how you would interpret it. ---
**Author:** ![Unregistered\_Bull](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/3da27b/32.png) [@Unregistered\_Bull](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Unregistered_Bull)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2006, 11:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-be-the-best-way-to-expel-illegals-and-start-over-with-legal-immigration/351926/94 "2006-04-10T23:12:15Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > I was asked to interpret a passage from the treaty. Read it and tell me how you would interpret it. If they became citizens, then it doesn’t make a damn. They can retain any part of their culture that doesn’t violate US law. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2006, 11:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-be-the-best-way-to-expel-illegals-and-start-over-with-legal-immigration/351926/95 "2006-04-10T23:15:44Z")
> [@Unregistered Bull](#): > > If they became citizens, then it doesn’t make a damn. They can retain any part of their culture that doesn’t violate US law. But that doesn’t answer the question. The words are there. What do they mean? ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2006, 11:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-be-the-best-way-to-expel-illegals-and-start-over-with-legal-immigration/351926/96 "2006-04-10T23:19:48Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > That the people were welcome to choose to stay and become citizens, but thet they would be expected to assimilate into the American culture (whatever it was at that time) and not hold on to the Mexican culture. It seems rather explicit, even if the term “culture” is inherently broad. > > How do you read it? > > Overall, I think the article expands on that very point,that these people who so choose would be granted all the rights and priveleges of citizenship. Well, reviewing it again, I see no indication that they were required to surrender their language or customs: > [@](#): > > The Mexicans who, in the territories aforesaid, **shall not preserve the character of citizens of the Mexican Republic** , conformably with what is stipulated in the preceding article, shall be incorporated into the Union of the United States, and be admitted at the proper time (to be judged of by the Congress of the United States) **to the enjoyment of all the rights of citizens of the United States** , according to the principles of the Constitution; and in the mean time, shall be maintained and protected in the free enjoyment of their liberty and property, and secured in the free exercise of their religion without restriction. “Character of citizens” addreesses citizenship: those who stop voting in Mexican elections, surrender the right to run for office in Mexico, surrender or abandon their Mexican passports, etc. Those are “characters” of citizenship. Regardless whether they take _siestas_ in the heat of the day, celebrate Christmas with _piñatas_, celebrate _Día de los Muertos_, or conduct all their business transactions in Spanish, only their actions as citizens appears to be adddressed in the treaty. ---
**Author:** ![Unregistered\_Bull](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/3da27b/32.png) [@Unregistered\_Bull](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Unregistered_Bull)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2006, 11:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-be-the-best-way-to-expel-illegals-and-start-over-with-legal-immigration/351926/97 "2006-04-10T23:19:59Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > But that doesn’t answer the question. The words are there. What do they mean? “The Mexicans who, in the territories aforesaid, shall not preserve the character of citizens of the Mexican Republic, conformably with what is stipulated in the preceding article, shall be incorporated into the Union of the United States. and be admitted at the proper time (to be judged of by the Congress of the United States) to the enjoyment of all the rights of citizens of the United States, according to the principles of the Constitution; and in the mean time, shall be maintained and protected in the free enjoyment of their liberty and property, and secured in the free exercise of their religion without; restriction.” This? It means they aren’t Mexican. There Americans “protected in the free enjoyment of their liberty and property, and secured in the free exercise of their religion without; restriction.” Which means they can eat a taco or sing ¡Feliz Navidad! at Christmas time without running afoul of the law. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2006, 11:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-be-the-best-way-to-expel-illegals-and-start-over-with-legal-immigration/351926/98 "2006-04-10T23:23:29Z")
Oh, here was the “previous article” cited in the article already quoted: > [@](#): > > Mexicans now established in territories previously belonging to Mexico, and which remain for the future within the limits of the United States, as defined by the present treaty, **shall be free to continue where they now reside, or to remove at any time to the Mexican Republic, retaining the property which they possess in the said territories, or disposing thereof, and removing the proceeds wherever they please, without their being subjected, on this account, to any contribution, tax, or charge whatever.** > > \*\*Those who shall prefer to remain in the said territories may either retain the title and rights of Mexican citizens, or acquire those of citizens of the United States. \*\* But they shall be under the obligation to make their election within one year from the date of the exchange of ratifications of this treaty; and those who shall remain in the said territories after the expiration of that year, without having declared their intention to retain the character of Mexicans, shall be considered to have elected to become citizens of the United States. > **In the said territories, property of every kind, now belonging to Mexicans not established there, shall be inviolably respected. The present owners, the heirs of these, and all Mexicans who may hereafter acquire said property by contract, shall enjoy with respect to it guarantees equally ample as if the same belonged to citizens of the United States.** It contains not one word regarding an unspecified “culture” nor language. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2006, 11:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-be-the-best-way-to-expel-illegals-and-start-over-with-legal-immigration/351926/99 "2006-04-10T23:23:38Z")
> [@bigpappadiaz](#): > > What we need here is a little famine to hit the States. With food shortages, the people of the US will naturally come together to single out and expel the illegals. We already got the ICE camps to handle the teeming millions. All we need is something to smoke 'em out. That’s what I see happening soon. 😕 “ICE camps”? ---
**Author:** ![Unregistered\_Bull](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/3da27b/32.png) [@Unregistered\_Bull](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Unregistered_Bull)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2006, 11:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-be-the-best-way-to-expel-illegals-and-start-over-with-legal-immigration/351926/100 "2006-04-10T23:31:29Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > 😕 “ICE camps”? [http://www.ice.gov/graphics/index.htm](http://www.ice.gov/graphics/index.htm) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-be-the-best-way-to-expel-illegals-and-start-over-with-legal-immigration/351926.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-be-the-best-way-to-expel-illegals-and-start-over-with-legal-immigration/351926.md?page=6)