[one_third]Liberal – Babatunde Ojo
The issue with chain migration is that it is hard to pinpoint how quickly and efficiently the process is. When a U.S. Citizen files to have their spouse/child/parent from another country to come to America, the time it takes seems to vary.
Finding the correct piece of legislation is what is really holding back my opinion on the matter. How many family members re admitted at once from one U.S. citizen? How long is the wait process? Can green card holders apply for the same amount of direct family members? These are the questions I feel we should be asking accompanied with statistics that support the evidence.
Overall, this seems like a non-issue as chain migration has been a part of the American legal system since the time of the Immigration Act of 1924 (I believe it has been a part of the system longer but I am unsure due to it being difficult to pinpoint the correct “lingo” being used at the time). Trying to abolish chain migration is just another excuse to prohibit decent people from entering the country despite that being the reason of how our country was founded.
[one_third]Independent —Carmel Rafalowsky
Chain migration is a simple concept that most of us are familiar with, although probably not under that specific name. It refers to the process in which one individual or family relocates from one town/area/country to another, and migrants from the individual’s original town follow suit. This progression is probably familiar to most readers, and with good reason; not only is it how many families migrate and ‘become’ American, but it is also how America transformed into the ‘melting pot’ we know today.
I have mixed feelings on the matter of chain migration. On the one hand, I think it is an integral part of American history. I love the Little Italy and Chinatown neighborhoods of Manhattan as much as the next guy, and that is—to a certain extent—how my own family ended up in America. So how I can be against it? On the other hand, over the years, chain migration can seriously alter a location’s culture, which can be strange and discomforting to watch.
I am a commuter at NJIT and live in a town with heavy Korean and Chinese influence. In many ways, I think I think it is cool and appreciate the influence on my town—I can pick up bubble tea, ramen, and Korean BBQ all within a two-block radius. On the other hand, many storefronts are written in Chinese or Korean, and I do not like that much at all. I find it alienating, and wish they were written in English—since that is the standardized language of our country. That is where I draw the line: I think chain migration is dandy until it alters a culture and locale to the point of going against American traditions and culture.
[one_third]Conservative – Adrian Wong
Donald Trump has made it clear that he wants to stop chain migration. The term “chain migration” is used to describe the laws that allow US Citizens or green card holders to bring their family members to the United States. Most people, including Trump agree that it makes sense to allow immigrants to bring their spouses and minor children to the United States, but the debate occurs over who else should be allowed.
I agree with Trump that only those members should be allowed to immigrate to the United States. I think the right to immigrate to the United States should be earned by each adult who is then allowed to bring their minor children and spouse. I think they should all be thoroughly vetted. Then, if their other relatives want to come to the United States, they should earn their right to immigrate as an entirely new family. I think the United States should do everything in its ability to make sure that immigrants are coming here to succeed and help our country rather than to leech off of our money. If a foreign individual can show how he or she is going to be helpful to the United States, they should be allowed in along with their spouse and children under 18. Anyone else should be seen as a different entity.