As social justice activists, should we advocate that the US embrace an open door immigration policy?

Rally, Civic Center Park, Denver, CO.

With the end of the Cold War and the advent of a truly global market economy, the issue of immigration has become one of the most important ones confronting social justice activists. What responsibility do we have to the hungry, homeless stranger who arrives at our door, especially when her poverty is tied in complex ways to our prosperity? What are the ethical obligations of citizens of a wealthy country like to the U.S. to people driven by market forces and scarce resources to leave their country of origin to seek work here, whether they have the required documentation or not? 

One answer proposed by social justice activists is "the open door policy," which would open American citizenship to all who seek it. This idea has been criticized by, among others, social justice activists who contend that the potential negative economic consequences of an open door policy would fall primarily upon the domestic poor, i.e., upon those American citizens whose earning power would be devalued by a sudden influx of cheap labor. In John Rawls's terms, then, we face a conflict over which option is of "the greatest benefit to the least advantaged:" An open door policy would be a great benefit to the globally least advantaged, i.e., the immigrant poor, but, at least in the short term, that benefit would come at the expense of the locally least advantaged, i.e., the domestic poor.

In our third debate, we'll ask: As social justice activists, should we advocate that the US embrace an open door immigration policy?

Group 1 will take the "Yes" position; Group 3 will take the "No" position. To develop your arguments and counterarguments (and to be an engaged audience member), please read Stephen Macedo's "The Moral Dilemma of U.S. Immigration Policy: Open Boders vs. Social Justice" in (Debating Immigration, Carol M. Swain, ed.). Macedo makes a social justice argument against the open borders policy; you may also want to read "Aliens and Citizens: The Case for Open Borders," by Joseph H. Carens, which makes a social justice argument on behalf of open borders. In any case, Please note that your group need not limit its arguments to those found in the readings. You should craft your own arguments, drawing on the readings or inventing original arguments as the group sees fit. The important thing is that your arguments be clear, coherent, persuasive, and capable of holding up to criticism.

The Macedo reading is available online via Penrose. Click here, and then click the link that says "Access online. Individual login with EBL required." You'll then need to log in to Penrose (using your DU ID and passcode) and then to log in to EBL. If you already have an EBL account, log in with your EBL username and password. (If you've forgotten it, you can retrieve it.) If you don't have an EBL account, then create one by clicking on "Create new account." Once you get to the e-book, the simplest way to to find Macedo's chapter is by clicking "Read online" and then using the search bar at the top of the screen to go to page 63. 

Please note that rhere may be a limit on how many people can read Debating Immigration at one time, so try to stagger your readings among group members to avoid being unable to "check out" the book.

The Carens article is here.

Mural, El Centro Humanitario, California St. and Park Ave. West, Denver, CO.