Blue Collar Muse offers one of the more reasonable arguments for stricter immigration enforcement: crime prevention. The argument is that illegal immigrants sometimes commit crimes. Thus, if we deported illegals or barred them from coming here in the first place, we would prevent those crimes. I am sympathetic, especially when it comes to terror-related crime.

However, there are still some problems with this reasoning. For every crime committed by illegals, there are undoubtedly also good deeds. Do we throw out the baby with the bathwater when we crack down on illegal immigration? Can we say for sure that the overall net effect would be negative? I think not. To be fair to BCM, he is talking specifically in the context of sanctuary cities, where illegals with criminal records are still not deported. This is inexcusable, for sure, but we have to make a clear distinction between dealing with sanctuary cities and our nation’s policy as a whole.