Skip Navigation
Megan McArdle

Megan McArdle - Megan McArdle is a senior editor for The Atlantic who writes about business and economics. She has worked at three start-ups, a consulting firm, an investment bank, a disaster recovery firm at Ground Zero, and The Economist. She is currently on leave.
More

Megan was born and raised on the Upper West Side of Manhattan, and yes, she does enjoy her lattes, as well as the occasional extra-dry skim-milk cappuccino. Her checkered work history includes three start-ups, four years as a technology project manager for a boutique consulting firm, a summer as an associate at an investment bank, and a year spent as sort of an executive copy girl for one of the disaster-recovery firms at Ground Zero � all before the age of 30.

While working at Ground Zero, Megan started Live From the WTC, a blog focused on economics, business, and cooking. She may or may not have been the first major economics blogger, depending on whether we are allowed to throw outlying variables such as Brad Delong out of the set. From there it was but a few steps down the slippery slope to freelance journalism. She has worked in various capacities for The Economist, where she wrote about economics and oversaw the founding of Free Exchange, the magazine's economics blog. She has also maintained her own blog, Asymmetrical Information, which moved to The Atlantic, along with its owner, in August 2007.

Megan holds a bachelor's degree in English literature from the University of Pennsylvania and an M.B.A. from the University of Chicago. After a lifetime as a New Yorker, she now resides in northwest Washington, D.C., where she is still trying to figure out what one does with an apartment larger than 400 square feet.

Eric Balderas and the Rule of Law

By Megan McArdle
Jun 22 2010, 10:59 AM ET Comment

4713697307_ff6f1aaef9.jpg

[Timothy B. Lee]


One of the recurring arguments in the immigration debate is that strict enforcement of immigration laws is required by the rule of law. It's been made by prominent figures such as Edwin Meese III and James Carafano of the Heritage Foundation, and it's also an argument that pops up when I write about immigration on my own blog.

This argument is frequently made in response to the charge that opponents of immigration reform (which they inevitably label "amnesty") are hostile to immigrants themselves. They insist, to the contrary, that they are merely defending the principle that everyone needs to obey the law. They actually like immigrants, and might even be willing to welcome more immigrants into the country, but only after we've "secured our borders." They worry that "amnesty" would "reward lawbreaking," and however much they might love immigrants, they think it's only fair that they follow the law like everyone else.

The vacuousness of this argument becomes apparent when we consider the case of Eric Balderas, a 19-year-old Harvard student whose parents brought him to the United States illegally when he was 4 years old. Balderas's case came to national attention when he attempted to fly home from a trip to Mexico and American immigration authorities threatened to deport him. It appears that national attention has spared Balderas deportation for now, but he could be legally deported at any time and there are millions of American voters who think he, and others like him, should be sent back to the countries of their birth.

The Boston Globe says that some people consider Balderas a poster child for immigration reform, but "others argue that families who violated federal law should not be rewarded." That argument leaves me scratching my head. If we're going insist that immigrants follow the law like everyone else, then it seems that ordinary principles of law should apply. So, for example, we don't hold 4-year-olds criminally responsible for their actions, nor do we hold 19-year-olds responsible for their actions 15 years prior. Maybe Balderas's parents should be punished, but Balderas himself certainly isn't responsible for having sneaked into the country with them. And even setting aside the fact that he was 4 years old at the time of his crime, crimes in the United States typically have statutes of limitations. In Massachusetts, almost every crime other than rape and murder has a statute of limitations less than 15 years. If we give "amnesty" to someone who commits robbery with a deadly weapon after 10 years, surely we can do the same to a kid who snuck across a border with his parents 15 years in the past.

The inevitable retort is that Balderas should go back to Mexico, wait in line, and then re-enter when he's obtained legal permission to do so. The problem is that the law makes it effectively impossible for many immigrants to do this. I don't know the details of Balderas's situation, but Forbes estimates that a low-skilled 30-year-old Mexican with a high school diploma and an American sister will wait 131 years for a green card. There may literally be nothing Balderas can do to live legally in the country he calls home in the foreseeable future.

Balderas's real crime is neither sneaking across the border 15 years ago nor failing to fill out the right paperwork. Rather, his crime is belonging to a nationality that American policy makers have decided is over-represented in this country. And there's a significant constituency for this policy among American voters, some of whom simply believe that there are too many foreigners here. But this viewpoint has little to do with the rule of law. The rule of law doesn't demand that we punish children for the crimes of their parents, or that we punish people for crimes they committed decades ago. And if you demand stricter enforcement of the existing laws while vociferously opposing all proposals to expand the legal channels for coming to this country, then I hope you'll forgive me if I conclude that you don't actually care about people like Eric Balderas.



Presented by

More at The Atlantic

The Job Market Crashes to Earth A Miserable Jobs Month
Why Do Asian Americans Have the Worst Long-Term Unemployment? Why Asian-Americans Have the Worst Long-Term Joblessness
A Blow, but a Softer One, to the Defense of Marriage Act A Blow to the Defense of Marriage Act
Why Are Democrats Losing the Wisconsin Recall? Why Are Democrats Losing the Wisconsin Recall?
Get Ready: Milky Way to Collide With Neighboring Galaxy in 4 Billion Years Milky Way to Collide With Neighbor in 4 Billion Years

Join the Discussion

After you comment, click Post. If you’re not already logged in you will be asked to log in or register.
blog comments powered by Disqus

Just In

View All Correspondents

The Biggest Story in Photos

Afghanistan: May 2012

Jun 1, 2012

Subscribe Now

SAVE 59%! 10 issues JUST $2.45 PER COPY

Facebook

Newsletters

Sign up to receive our free newsletters

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)

Megan McArdle
from the Magazine

Why You Can’t Get a Taxi

And how an upstart company may change that

Europe’s Real Crisis

The Continent’s problems are as much demographic as financial. They won’t go away soon.

Why Companies Fail

GM’s stock price has sunk by a third since its IPO. Why is corporate turnaround so difficult…