On Undocumented Immigration, some Reading

• Human Dignity is Not Dependent on a Person's Citizenship or Immigration Status Bishop Mark J. Seitz (USCCB), Sr. Mary Haddad, RSM (CHA), and Kerry Alys Robinson (CCUSA) have issued a statement in response to action taken by the Trump Administration rescinding guidance related to "protected areas" in immigration enforcement.
• Worth revisiting and reading in full -- Pope John Paul II's “Undocumented Migrants: Message of Pope John Paul II for World Migration Day” (1996).
• Debate: Deportations, Trump, Human Dignity and the State. In a discussion with Pablo Christian Soenen, project manager for the Initiative on Catholic Social Thought and Public Life at Georgetown University, and a student at Georgetown’s Institute for the Study of International Migration. Santiago Ramos asks:

  What is the principle by which we can distinguish a good deportation regime from a bad one? Given that deportations and its attendant tragedies happen under all administrations, then what are the specific steps that would make Trump’s plan worse than, say Obama’s? What would make Trump’s immigration law enforcement, and his deportation regime, exceptionally cruel and unjust? What is the red line — if there is one — that separates Obama’s deportation policy and the one Trump hopes to implement?

• The Rights of Irregular Migrants, by Joseph H. Carens. Ethics & International Affairs, Volume 22 , Issue 2 , Summer 2008 , pp. 163 - 186.
• Dignitas Migrantis: On the Morality of Deportation, by Fr. Matthew Gonzalez. Homiletic and Pastoral Review September 11, 2024.

J.D. Vance and "Ordo Amoris"

• Vice President Vance says U.S. bishops should ‘do better’ on supporting immigration enforcement Crux News 01/27/25.
• A Primer: How the Catholic Church partners with the U.S. government to serve migrants, by Tyler Arnold. Catholic News Agency. 02/03/25.
• JD Vance is Right About the "Ordo Amoris", by R.R Reno. Compact:

  I suspect that most of Vance’s critics anguished over his forthright affirmation of our love of our fellow citizens. They fear "nativism," or some other manifestation of xenophobia. But we should not let disordered loves discredit a proper order of loves. ... Love is jealous. I love my wife to the exclusion of others. The same holds for my country. But love is also fecund. A man who loves his wife with selfless devotion has prepared his heart to love his country and make sacrifices on behalf of his fellow citizens.

  Vance is not undermining America’s concern for the other nations and peoples, for the same fecundity operates on the world stage. God forbid that our future rests in soulless technocracy and bloodless “best practices.” We need leaders who love others rather than manipulating or managing them, including those in far-flung lands. This love must be encouraged, trained, and deepened—which happens when we live in accord with a warm and unapologetic ordo amoris.

• "Ordo Amoris" Is Not The Point, by Brendan Hodge. DarwinCatholic 02/01/25. A response to Vice President J.D. Vance's use of Ordo Amoris as an apologetic for Trump's administration policies:

  One thing Vance has become very adept at is turning a policy question into what sounds like a moral balance of absolutely. He famously said as a senator that he didn't care about Ukrainians, and when asked why said it was because his duty was to the people of Ohio.

  But of course, it's not a question whether we should care about Ukraine OR the people of our home state. One can easily care to some extent about both. And even if one cares more about local needs than international needs, that doesn't mean that one cannot do anything to help those abroad.

  Following that example, total US aid to Ukraine over the three years of war has been $113 billion. That's a lot, until you consider the US government spends $6.8 trillion annually. Ukraine aid has constituted roughly 0.5% of federal spending over the last three years.

  Maybe there should be no Ukraine aid at all, maybe it's not a good cause or one the US should be involved in, but if so that needs to be discussed on its own terms. It's not sufficient to say, "Local concerns are higher priority, therefore we can't spend a cent on this particular non-local thing."

  Likewise with any number of other issues.

  Pointing out that we're called by Jesus to love everyone does not end arguments about enacting some particular policy, and neither does pointing out that we have the greatest duty to those nearest to us and thus most dependent on our personal help. Those are both important principals to recall when making any decisions about policy, but the policies have to be evaluated and chosen based upon themselves and the necessary trade-offs which implementing them would require.