Among the left’s outrage about the arrest for possible deportation of Mahmoud Khalil — the Columbia University rabble-rouser who distributed propaganda on behalf of a foreign terrorist organization, Hamas — is that the former student is a legal permanent resident.  “He has a green card!” they exclaim whenever legal permanent residents are deported.  Take for example the “Milwaukee mom,” here since practically birth who was sent back to Laos...after being released from prison for interstate trafficking of marijuana.

The left conveniently ignores details about immigration law.  A visa is not an entitlement to enter the United States.  All a visa does is allow an airline to board a potential entrant to the United States and deliver him to a U.S. port of entry, at which time U.S. immigration decides his admissibility.  Guess what!  If he told the embassy where he got a visa that he was coming as a tourist and U.S. immigration finds a suitcase full of construction tools, he’s leaving tonight on a plane. 

And once one crosses that border, neither a visa nor a green card immunizes him from account for things like spreading propaganda for foreign terrorist organizations like Hamas.  Or supporting foreign terrorist organizations like Hezb’allah by “just happening” to have attended a terrorist’s funeral while back in the old country. 

But I want to raise an undiscussed question: legal permanent residency.

Legal permanent residency (LPR) is a status whereby an alien enjoys the right to live in the United States for an indeterminate period of time.  It usually comes from a relationship, like marrying an American citizen, being the minor child of somebody who marries a U.S. citizen (i.e., a stepchild), or being the foreign parent(s) of an American citizen.

“Indeterminate” does not mean “forever.”  One can lose LPR status if one stays abroad too long (almost certainly after two years).  After all, LPR means “permanent resident,” and if you’re not actually living here, you’re not a resident.

You can also lose LPR status for doing a variety of things that would make you ineligible for a visa in the first place.  Like committing a felony.  Like supporting terrorism.  Like lying or concealing material facts that were relevant to getting that visa (e.g., one’s true intentions).  That’s “misrepresentation.”

So being a “permanent resident” is not just like being a citizen.  If anything, it’s supposed to be a probationary status toward becoming a citizen.

In general, a person who is an LPR can be naturalized if he has been an LPR for at least five years and spent at least half of that time actually physically present in the United States.

One doesn’t have to become a citizen.  One can.  But the fact that so many aliens are content just to remain LPRs disturbs me.

Becoming a citizen obviously confers additional legal protections, benefits, and responsibilities.  But it also shows an attachment to this country, the country in which one is living.

The marijuana-trafficker expelled to Laos lived in the United States 37 years.  Explain how she had time to figure out how to mail pot to another state but didn’t have time to become an American citizen?  Does that say something about her priorities?

At a time when America faces a massive influx of foreigners — a tidal wave one political party applauds and would open the doors to — we have lost focus on what was previously deemed an essential component of the immigration process: assimilation.  Rather than incorporate the foreigner by having him choose to become an American, we are content to let large cohorts just sit around and enjoy LPR status.  It seems some people are primarily interested in pushing naturalization only when a “get out the vote” federal election nears.

Perhaps at one time this made sense, but does it today?  Are huge pools of unnaturalized LPRs telling us what we suspected in the first place: that America for them represents only a place of personal economic advancement, not necessarily one to which they have now committed themselves as persons?  Is the United States just a chance to make money and a national roof over one’s head?

In the process of “immigration reform,” Congress perhaps should consider whether “legal permanent resident” status should be capped.  Should a foreigner with LPR status be required, say, after ten years to become a citizen or forfeit residency?

Obviously, some exceptions would have to be built into the law (and, to some degree, already exist in naturalization procedures).  Elderly people, for example, might not be expected to master language or civics lessons.

But for the average LPR (and “average” means “most”), should we not expect that after ten years they be proficient in English, know something of American history, government, and culture, and want to cast their lot with this country as American citizens?  If not, why not?  That’s assimilation.  That’s the natural culmination of wanting to be a permanent immigrant in another country.

Image via Pexels.