Arguments Against Immigration Restriction

1106 Words3 Pages

Chelsea Hansen
Professor Dan Johnson
HIST 175-97039
12 May 2017
Immigration Restriction: Challenged by Opposing Views
In the early 1900s, an increase in immigration sparked a debate over whether or not the United States should implement immigration restrictions. There were arguments saying that immigrants were, illiterate, less educated, and were the cause of the rising crime rate. People believed that immigrants lowered the standards of living and were creating an inferior race. Many Americans felt that immigrants were raising unemployment rates and taking American jobs for lower wages. All of these beliefs were countered by the better arguments of those against immigration restriction.
Prescott F. Hall and many Americans in favor of limiting …show more content…

The number of juveniles among the population of children of immigrants was considerably higher than the number of juveniles of children of native-born Americans. If citizens were in favor of immigration restriction, they would stop looking there for a valid argument. The reason that the argument against immigration restriction prevails in this situation is because they dive deeper to find out why there were more juveniles among the immigrant born population. It was discovered that the children born to immigrants seemed more juvenile than native-born children was due to the fact that they largely populated the cities, not the rural areas. Crime during this period and even today were far more prevalent in the city than in the suburbs. Those that believed the crime was a reason to reduce the flow of immigrants, also believed education to be a factor. Hall states that "foreign whites are almost three times illiterate as native whites." Although this may have been true, the argument was countered by the fact that children of …show more content…

Citizens in favor of immigration restriction talked about only letting immigrants into the country that would provide a "real benefit to the country," saying that if the United States continued to let in immigrants they believe to be second-class, they would ruin the lives of American citizens. If this is the case, Americans must have forgotten the thousands of immigrants that had bettered American lives, to include, Jacob A. Riis, Nikola Tesla, and Frank Morrison. If the U.S. were to put a limit on the type of person they let in the country, which is what most of the people in favor of immigration restriction were asking for, the U.S. would be completely disregarding the constitution. If all men are created equal, they should be given equal rights and equal opportunities. If immigration is restricted based on wealth, you lose people such as Andrew Carnegie. If it is constrained by religion, people such as Samuel Gompers never make it to the country to change the face of organized labor. As many people against restriction argue, if you screen the type of person you allow into the country, you only get the people who are born great, which is few in

More about Arguments Against Immigration Restriction

Open Document