Milwaukee's funniest blogger, John McAdams, is upset with the National Association of Hispanic Journalists' style guide.
Conveniently ignoring the NAHJ's prefatory remarks, which correctly point out that "being an undocumented immigrant is not a crime," McAdams accuses the journalists of "trying to ban the word 'illegal,'" which, McAdams further claims, is "simply an insistence that honest language be avoided."
Unfortunately for McAdams, who is reportedly a professor at Marquette University, the journalists have it right and McAdams has it exactly backwards. It's accuracy that the NAHJ is seeking.
Needless to say, the NAHJ's discussion is considerably more nuanced and informed than McAdams's typically hamfisted denunciations.
For example, millions of immigrants entered the country with valid visas, but now those visas are expired. It is not a crime to be in the United States on an expired visa.
As a matter of fact one of the initial steps in a deportation proceeding is the issuance of a Notice to Appear at a hearing at which a non-citizen may present argument explaining her situation. They are not arrested, which is often what happens to people who have committed a crime.
Not even the legal immigrants who might be subject to deportation for having been convicted of a crime are arrested for being potentially subject to deportation. Rather, like it or not, they are protected by a considerable body of law.
To hell with all that, says McAdams, just be "honest" — like him — and call them "illegals" whether they've done something illegal or not.
Best of all, McAdams is actually more concerned about referring to immigrants as "aliens," a federal statutory term of art, because this one time he saw a scary looking extraterrestrial creature chase Sigourney Weaver around a spaceship. Not a Mexican.
Finally, for some obscure reason known only to the fevered consciousness of John McAdams, he appeals for more Christians and honest blacks to become reporters as opposed to dishonest blacks like the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel's Eugene Kane.
If the Riverside Theatre is looking for an opening act for Bill Maher next week, McAdams would be the perfect choice.
July 15, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
"It is not a crime to be in the United States on an expired visa."
But it is illegal?
Well, this is the distinction the NAHJ is drawing. "Illegal alien" is more apt to describe someone who gained unauthorized entry initially.
But where the entry was authorized and the visa has since expired, describing such a person as an "illegal alien" or worse, simply an "illegal," is incorrect.
It's like calling someone a criminal who hasn't been convicted of a crime or, as we saw during this year's Supreme Court election campaign, calling someone a criminal whose conviction has been reversed.
It's describing people with actions they haven't been proven to have committed.
Whether the NAHJ is motivated by politics or so-called "political correctness" isn't the point.
It's just a matter of more precise terminology and the undue attachment of social stigma by a careless press.
Not to mention the questionable status of "illegal" as a noun.
No, it actually is illegal to be here on an expired visa. You may not be sent to jail but you will - unless you can change your status - be sent home.
The style guide refers to "persons who do not have the federal documentation to show they are legally entitled to work, visit or live here."
This is mealymouthed nonsense. The folks we are referring to don't have such documentation because they are not "legally entitled to work, visit or live here." It's not just that they forgot their library card or left their driver's license at home.
As for whether such persons have been proven to be here illegally, i.e., whether they actually are not legally entitled to work, visit or live here, that's another question. It does not go to use of the term "illegal immigrant" but to whether that term has been correctly applied to someone.
As for whether such persons have been proven to be here illegally, i.e., whether they actually are not legally entitled to work, visit or live here, that's another question.
Huh? That's exactly the question the NAHJ is addressing. In immigration law, illegal entry is distinguishable from legal entry followed by a visa's expiration.
The term "illegal alien" is a reference to the entry, not the current status of the visa.
Calling a person an "illegal alien" the moment after their visa expires falsely places them in the same legal category as somebody that came over the border in a crate of pineapples and has been fraudulently evading authorities ever since.
It does not go to use of the term "illegal immigrant" but to whether that term has been correctly applied to someone.
Which is precisely the NAHJ's point!
God forbid that one should be slow to use the adjective-cum-noun 'illegal' to pick out someone who works hard, doesn't steal, is resolutely non-violent, is a good neighbour, coaches a kids' team, drives soberly and safely, and raises the children to be the same way.
I don't think that "illegal alien" is a legal term of art with the meaning you suggest. Someone who is here after the expiration of a visa is here without the legal right to be here, i.e., is here illegally. In any event, NAHJ is limiting their admonition to avoid the term to those who did not enter illegally. They don't want to use it all.
Back to McAdams: I note he did not invite other faiths or races to become reporters. Perhaps they're not honest enough for him.
If the Riverside Theatre is looking for an opening act for Bill Maher next week, McAdams would be the perfect choice.
Unfortunately, for the McPerfessor, not even American TV would sponsor him. They have principles, you know.
Post a Comment