If Rule of Law Allows This, Why Oppose It?

Do we want and demand that all our immigration laws be enforced, and kept -- or just the ones that are hard on the undocumented residents?

What if it was within the law to take undocumented people, and grant them a deferment, allowing them to stay an extra year? Would we say, "Yes, if the law allows this, let's do it. Let's let them stay. For this, too, is our law, and we believe in rule of law."

The news is of three sisters, brought to the United States legally as children, who overstayed the visas and grew up as undocumented residents. When the law caught up, they faced a June 15 deportation.

But the law -- that would be ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) stepped in and offered a deferment, allowing the three sisters to stay another year -- not staying as illegal residents, but as legal ones.

I am imagining if ICE made such a decision, it did it because the law provides for it. Why, then, should those who argue for rule of law be upset? If it is rule of law they want, and if rule of law provides that this can happen, why should they oppose it?