| | |
|
EdsonSandovalSecondEssay 3 - 20 May 2024 - Main.EbenMoglen
|
| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="SecondEssay" |
|---|
| | | As a law student, my perspectives on immigration, law, and politics are conflicting. I seek to comprehend conflicting perspectives of immigration reform to understand other stances. From my perspective, I cannot fathom how policymakers could have ideals which negate basic human rights and the ability to push for social advancement. After all, the very foundation of the United States was based on the social advancement of immigrants and the ability to achieve success if you were willing to work for it. Yet, this is not how our current world works and I accept it. The long and complicated history of immigration in the United States provides for precedent we continue to take into consideration with developing immigration reform.
Yet, I acknowledge that I am biased in my perspectives due to my individual upbringing. As an immigrant, I remain sympathetic to the journeys other migrants and refugee-seekers make as I understand the risk they put themselves in by entering a country which refuses to acknowledge their existence. Nonetheless, I make an effort to understand differing perspectives and where they stem from. The nationalist desire for self-preservation and retainment of benefits for U.S. citizens is understandable. I acknowledge that there are good arguments from an anti-immigration perspective as well. Admittedly, I am provided the immense benefit of being a beneficiary of the DACA program and my experience may differ from someone who migrates under more extreme circumstances. The difference here (and what I strive to push for) is for others to attempt to look at issues from an unbiased perspective and take more time to understand these differences, resulting in thoughtful and forward-looking discourse. We as a society have a lot to benefit from implementing such a practice. | |
>
> |
As your concluding paragraph begins by acknowledging, there is no "unbiased perspective." In a society offering the possibility of reinvention, and shaped in all of its essences by immigrants, that must be particularly true. Democracy doesn't require objectivity of us; it requires that we agree to govern ourselves on the basis of our equality. Together, in whatever version of together we can forge, we are the sovereign here.
Yours is a powerfully-important but by no means unbiased point of view. Because a President of one party, unable to get simple justice for you and people like you legislatively, chose to use an executive leniency to accord you as much basic dignity and freedom to exist in society as no statute forbade, the other party has made it a point of power to contest in practice what they cannot quite bring themselves to say out loud: that they consider you unworthy of even these few basic freedoms to live life here. You are not supposed to be unbiased in that context. Advocacy of an "unbiased view" that doesn't exist doesn't make your essay stronger.
But the state of DREAMers and other DACA beneficiaries doesn't need to be retold at length; you can use a couple of sentences and some well-chosen links. What would make the essay much stronger and more useful to you and its readers would be a stronger focus on your lawyering as you intend it. How does your experience affect, specifically, how you would like to practice? What steps can you take in law school to help you achieve that objective?
| | |
You are entitled to restrict access to your paper if you want to. But we all derive immense benefit from reading one another's work, and I hope you won't feel the need unless the subject matter is personal and its disclosure would be harmful or undesirable.
To restrict access to your paper simply delete the "#" character on the next two lines: |
|
|
|
|
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform.
All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
|
|
| | |