{"id":157,"date":"2019-05-20T15:31:12","date_gmt":"2019-05-20T19:31:12","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/lawblogs.uc.edu\/ihrlr\/?p=157"},"modified":"2019-05-20T15:31:12","modified_gmt":"2019-05-20T19:31:12","slug":"words-matter-no-human-being-is-illegal","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lawblogs.uc.edu\/ihrlr\/2019\/05\/20\/words-matter-no-human-being-is-illegal\/","title":{"rendered":"Words Matter: No Human Being is Illegal"},"content":{"rendered":"

Most conversations about immigration include someone referring to others as \u201cillegal.\u201d The US government officially refers to certain people as \u201cillegal aliens.\u201d[1]<\/a><\/sup> Many migrants are accused of being in or entering the US \u201cillegally.\u201d Regardless of whether or not a person has committed a crime in entering the US without authorization, that person is not illegal. A person cannot be illegal. While certain actions may be criminal, or illegal, people cannot be illegal. Although, in the US, it is a federal crime to enter the country without inspection, it is not a crime to be present within the country without authorization.[2]<\/a><\/sup> Thus, a person living in the US without status, or without a valid visa, is not committing a crime.<\/p>\n

Referring to other people as illegal is grammatically incorrect. Otto Santa Ana, a linguist and professor in UCLA\u2019s Department of Chicana\/o Studies explains \u201c\u2019[w]e don\u2019t call pedestrians who cross in the middle of the street illegal pedestrians\u2019\u2026 \u2018A kid who skips school to go to Disneyland is not an illegal student. And yet that\u2019s a sort of parallel.\u2019\u201d[3]<\/a><\/sup> There are many linguists who argue against using the phrase \u201cillegal immigrant\u201d because it is neither \u201c\u2018accurate nor neutral\u2019\u201d and other people who break laws are not referred to as \u201cillegal.\u201d[4]<\/a><\/sup> Such language is dehumanizing and used to make it easier to justify harmful and dangerous policies against a group of people. The phrase \u201cillegal immigrant\u201d was not popularly used until World War II when it was used to describe Jewish refugees who fled to Palestine without authorization.[5]<\/a><\/sup> Elie Wiesel, a Nobel Peace Prize winner and Holocaust survivor, once said, \u201cknow that no human being is illegal. That is a contradiction in terms. Human beings can be beautiful or more beautiful, they can be fat or skinny, they can be right or wrong, but illegal? How can a human being be illegal?\u201d[6]<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

Although a migrant may have committed a crime in entering the US without inspection or authorization, \u201cillegal alien\u201d is not the proper way to describe them because \u201cillegal alien\u201d was not a legal term until it was used by the Court in Arizona v. United States<\/em>.[7]<\/a><\/sup> In the Immigration and Nationality Act, an \u201calien\u201d is someone who is neither a citizen nor a national of the United States.[8]<\/a><\/sup> The phrase \u201cillegal alien\u201d is not terminology used in the Act. In 2018, only months ago, the Justice Department instructed US attorney offices to refer to undocumented immigrants as \u201cillegal aliens.\u201d[9]<\/a><\/sup> The phrase has been popularized in the US to describe both documented and undocumented immigrants due to a misconception that undocumented immigrants, by virtue of existing, violate criminal law. Again, being present in the United States without a valid visa is not a violation of criminal law. Immigration attorney Shahid Haque-Hausrath writes:<\/p>\n

the term [illegal alien] is imprecise and is used to encompass individuals who are in the United States under vastly different circumstances. Some individuals are brought here against their will, such as victims of human trafficking. Others come here on valid visas but subsequently fall out of status. For instance, many victims of domestic violence have legal status that depends on the continued sponsorship of their abuser. Some individuals are here under \u2018temporary protected status\u2019 because of strife in their home country, but fall out of status when our government removes their protected status. To blanket all immigrants who are out of status as being \u2018illegals\u2019 is overly simplistic.[10]<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

Furthermore, Haque-Hausrath explains, the phrase \u201cillegal alien\u201d is used to \u201cdehumanize immigrants and divorce [us] from thinking of them as human beings. For some reason, this may serve as a defense mechanism to avoid feeling sympathy for undocumented immigrants, many of whom are separated from their children or loved ones when they are deported.\u201d[11]<\/a><\/sup> Additionally, a person does not need to demand sympathy in order to be recognized as a human being and to be allowed to exist.<\/p>\n

The Platform for International Cooperation on Undocumented Immigrants explains, as a part of its #WordsMatter initiative, that \u201clanguage shapes people\u2019s perceptions. Discriminatory language in reference to undocumented migrants leads to perceptions and actions which negatively impact the daily realities of undocumented migrants, [and] leads to perceptions and actions which negatively impact the daily realities of undocumented migrants.\u201d[12]<\/a><\/sup> Define American\u2019s #WordsMatter campaign encourages others, especially media outlets and politicians, to use more appropriate and correct terminology in referring to people living in the US without a path to permanent residency or citizenship. This terminology includes: \u201cnewest Americans, newcomers, undocumented citizens, unauthorized immigrants, families who have moved from one place to another, and people who weren\u2019t born in the United States.\u201d[13]<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

It is factually incorrect to refer to people as illegal. It is grammatically incorrect to refer to people as illegal. It is dehumanizing to refer to people as illegal. People may be undocumented, people may have entered the US without inspection, people may be living in the US without authorization, but none of those people are illegal. Although it is not technically incorrect to refer to the way someone entered the country as illegal, if they did so without inspection, using the word \u201cillegal\u201d in reference to immigration only serves to perpetuate the idea that migrants are criminals. In this context, the actions which violate criminal law may be referred to as \u201cunlawful.\u201d This term remains factually correct but does not impose criminality on migrants. Additionally, just because something is unlawful does not mean it is immoral; just because something is unlawful does not mean it is just to dehumanize people.<\/p>\n

This conversation is greater than referring to people as illegal aliens or referring to the way someone enters the US as legal or illegal. This conversation includes all of the language used to refer to migrants and immigration. There is no \u201cright way\u201d to come to the US; there is no \u201cline\u201d to get in the back of; there is no \u201cgood immigrant\u201d and there is no \u201cbad immigrant.\u201d The laws in the US dictating immigration force some people to wait for decades before they can be reunited with their families. These laws punish asylum seekers who flee violence and persecution. These laws pit some immigrants against others. The good immigrant\/bad immigrant dichotomy does nothing other than continue to impose criminality on undocumented Americans and require immigrants to work harder than US born citizens to be worthy of their place in the country, through things such as academic accomplishments. Immigration attorneys, activists, and politicians in particular must be aware of the importance of using the appropriate language so as to not continue to dehumanize fellow Americans or continue to embolden racists and their hateful rhetoric.<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Arizona v. United States<\/em>, 567 U.S. 387, 132 S.Ct. 2492 (2012). \u2191<\/a><\/li>\n
  2. 8 U.S.C \u00a71325. \u2191<\/a><\/li>\n
  3. Lauren Gambino, \u201c\u2018No human being is illegal\u2019: linguists argue against mislabeling of immigrants,\u201d in The Guardian<\/em>, available at https:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/us-news\/2015\/dec\/06\/illegal-immigrant-label-offensive-wrong-activists-say (Dec. 2015). \u2191<\/a><\/li>\n
  4. Id<\/em>. \u2191<\/a><\/li>\n
  5. Id<\/em>. \u2191<\/a><\/li>\n
  6. Long Island Wins, \u201cNo human being is illegal and Elie Wiesel,\u201d Long Island Wins<\/em> (July 2016). \u2191<\/a><\/li>\n
  7. See Arizona v. United States<\/em>, supra<\/em> note 1, at 2495. \u2191<\/a><\/li>\n
  8. 8 U.S.C \u00a71101(a)(3). \u2191<\/a><\/li>\n
  9. Tal Kopan, \u201cJustice Department: Use \u2018illegal aliens,\u2019 not \u2018undocumented,\u2019\u201d in CNN Politics<\/em>, available at<\/em> https:\/\/www.cnn.com\/2018\/07\/24\/politics\/justice-department-illegal-aliens-undocumented\/index.html (July 2018). \u2191<\/a><\/li>\n
  10. Shahid Haque-Hausrath, untitled, available at<\/em> http:\/\/www.nohumanbeingisillegal.com\/Home.html (2008). \u2191<\/a><\/li>\n
  11. Id<\/em>. \u2191<\/a><\/li>\n
  12. The Platform for International Cooperation on Undocumented Immigrants, \u201cWords Matter,\u201d available at <\/em>https:\/\/picum.org\/words-matter\/. \u2191<\/a><\/li>\n
  13. Define American, \u201cWords Matter,\u201d available at<\/em> https:\/\/defineamerican.com\/campaigns\/wordsmatter\/. \u2191<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

     <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    Most conversations about immigration include someone referring to others as \u201cillegal.\u201d The US government officially refers to certain people as \u201cillegal aliens.\u201d[1] Many migrants are accused of being in or entering the US \u201cillegally.\u201d Regardless of whether or not a person has committed a crime in entering the US without authorization, that person is not […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":31,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[10,4],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-157","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","6":"category-human-rights","7":"category-immigration-law","8":"czr-hentry"},"aioseo_notices":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawblogs.uc.edu\/ihrlr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/157","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawblogs.uc.edu\/ihrlr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawblogs.uc.edu\/ihrlr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawblogs.uc.edu\/ihrlr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/31"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawblogs.uc.edu\/ihrlr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=157"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/lawblogs.uc.edu\/ihrlr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/157\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":158,"href":"https:\/\/lawblogs.uc.edu\/ihrlr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/157\/revisions\/158"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawblogs.uc.edu\/ihrlr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=157"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawblogs.uc.edu\/ihrlr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=157"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawblogs.uc.edu\/ihrlr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=157"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}