Last updated on: 12/6/2007 | Author:

Mark Krikorian, MA Biography

Executive Director, Center for Immigration Studies (CIS)
Pro to the question "Should the US Federal Government Provide a Path to Citizenship for Undocumented Immigrants?"

“Amnesty is, of course, the most controversial part of any immigration plan. It rewards liars and scofflaws. It mocks those who obeyed the law…

Nevertheless…amnesty would be a risk worth taking. And the combination of a new enforcement paradigm plus reduced legal immigration would address many (though not all) of the potential problems with it…

Who should benefit from such an amnesty? The bulk should be people without criminal convictions who have U.S.-born children or U.S.-citizen or legal-resident spouses, plus those who came before age ten and have grown up here…

In addition, it would be prudent, given their long residence, to amnesty those who’ve lived here for more than a decade but don’t qualify under other categories.

The corollary to amnestying certain illegal aliens is that all those who do not qualify must be removed…Amnesty can be justified only as a transition to meticulous and aggressive enforcement.”

“Grand-Bargain Immigration Proposals Tend to Get the Order Backwards,”, Jan. 30, 2014

Involvement and Affiliations:
  • Executive Director, Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), 1995-present
  • Contributor, National Review Online
  • Former Editor, The Winchester Star, Virginia
  • Former Editor, Federation for American Immigration Reform
  • Former Visiting Fellow, the Nixon Center
  • MA, Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University
  • BA, Georgetown University
  • Twitter handle: @MarkSKrikorian
  • His grandmother is an Armenian Genocide survivor
Quoted in:
  1. Would Increasing Legal Immigration Reduce Illegal Immigration?
  2. Should E-Verify Be Mandatory for All Employers?