Pretty strong words from the NY Times editorial page:
Amnesty would undermine the integrity of the country’s immigration laws and would depress the wages of its lowest-paid native-born workers.
Back in 1986, Congress granted amnesty to an estimated three million illegal immigrants as part of a law that also promised to crack down on further illegal immigration by imposing sanctions on employers who knowingly violated the law. At that time, this page endorsed amnesty because it was tied to measures that promised to keep further rounds of illegal immigration in check. But years later there are twice as many illegal workers, and employer sanctions are widely deemed a joke. Workers pretend to show employers proof of citizenship or work visas and employers pretend they do not know the proof is fake.
Those dates look weird don’t they? They do because the NY Times wrote this in 2000. Not much has changed at all but their attitude has. This is what they wrote on June 8, 2013:
The bill is imperfect as it is, adding too many layers of border enforcement and too many obstacles on its overlong path to citizenship.
We know how opponents view the bill — as an irredeemable “amnesty” measure — and some of the ways they will try to kill it.
You would think the NY Times is hackish or something.