A Legal Alien's Lament
Dr. Manmeet Singh, from India, observes that if he'd come to the US illegally and married his US-citizen wife, he'd have a green card now:
People in my situation also probably represent the most law-abiding segment of the population. Any skirmish with the law--even one not involving violence--can result in loss of working privileges and possible deportation. A recent New York Times NYT -0.16% article about how legal immigrants' applications are being stalled because the officials who process files are overwhelmed with applications for deportation deferrals was a stinging slap in the face to all of those who chose to do the right thing and get here by following the rules.What is really surprising is that, in a nation that prides itself on being a nation of laws, the enforcers of the law are told to deliberately look away when it comes to illegal immigration. Also the politically correct term now is undocumented rather than illegal. I for one--after being fingerprinted, photographed, inquired about in detail every time I re-enter the U.S.--know for sure that being undocumented is illegal.
As an "alien," I have always been and always will be extremely grateful for the education that I have received and the opportunity to work and live in the U.S. In return I have been a good citizen (well, not exactly a citizen), paid my taxes, paid immigration attorneys and stayed on top of the paperwork. I have done so because I realize how important the legal process is and I have nothing but respect and reverence for the law of the land.
As the debate in Washington and the media centers on the plight of willful wrongdoers, America's reputation as a nation of laws and as a nation of immigrants is at stake here. Making the law-abiders feel discounted would not have rested well with the Founding Fathers either.








Mr. Singh chose a rather poor place for his opinion piece.
Placing it in the WSJ behind a paywall pretty much ensured he was going to tell his tale to the choir while preventing it being seen by many who would disagree and who he could then proceed to change their minds.
jerry at August 12, 2014 10:37 AM
Mr. Singh chose a rather poor place for his opinion piece.
Placing it in the WSJ behind a paywall pretty much ensured he was going to tell his tale to the choir while preventing it being seen by many who would disagree and who he could then proceed to change their minds.
Posted by: jerry at August 12, 2014 10:37 AM
I have noticed that too. It used to be that the Opinion pieces in the Wall Street Journal were free online. Very few of them were behind a pay wall. Now, almost all of them are.
I just refuse to pay their outrageous electronic subscription fees (barely lower than getting the real paper delivered late by snail mail) for the privilege of reading their articles.
Isab at August 12, 2014 11:06 AM
And the border is secure. Really!
Jim P. at August 12, 2014 1:10 PM
So, he's Singhing to the choir at the WSJ.
My ex-brother-in-law had the same frustrations. He and my sister tried for 3 years to get him a green card. He was a bio-chem major. After graduation he went to work for the Army and he got his green card before he got his first paycheck.
Canvasback at August 12, 2014 9:03 PM
Leave a comment