Executive Director, Center for Immigration Studies (CIS)
Pro to the question "Should the Government Allow Immigrants Who Are Here Illegally to Become US Citizens?"
"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," nationalreview.com, Jan. 30, 2014
Experts Individuals with advanced degrees in fields relevant to immigration. Also top-level government officials (such as foreign leaders, US presidents, Founding Fathers, Supreme Court Justices, members of legislative bodies, cabinet members, military leaders, etc.) with positions relevant to immigration.
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