Letter to the editor: It’s government’s duty to follow laws on immigrants |
Letters to the Editor

Letter to the editor: It’s government’s duty to follow laws on immigrants

In responding to Walter Williams’ commentary “Open borders would mean further spread of disease” (Aug. 31, TribLIVE), Dr. Amesh A. Adalja, in his commentary “Undocumented immigrants, open borders are not an infectious disease risk” (Sept. 10, TribLIVE), acknowledges that Williams’ position regarding infectious diseases is supported by citing the Immigration and Nationality Act (which mandates all immigrants and refugees undergo medical screenings). Adalja indicates the government has a right to do this screening. It is not a “right” of the government to follow the laws of this country, but a duty.

Adalja speaks of various infectious diseases with a dismissive tone — that they are either preventable or treatable, or not communicable or poorly communicable, such as Hansen’s disease (leprosy); states that a few of the diseases Williams mentioned are “almost laughable”; fails to mention the increase in multi-drug resistant tuberculosis; and then bemoans the fact that all Americans are not universally vaccinated.

Adalja disingenuously accuses Williams of taking a political position regarding illegal immigration, then states the reason “undocumented immigrants” are not screened is because U.S. laws have “criminalized” them and driven them into hiding (Does that include the ones who are regularly out protesting?). Following Adalja’s logic, criminal activity is the fault of our laws, not the criminals.

Adalja conveniently omits the fact that illegal immigrants have full access to our health care system on a regular basis.

Sheila R. Krill


TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.