One of the greatest population growth factors in the United States is illegal immigration from the neighboring countries. Therefore, the U.S. government is taking several measures to stem the rise of the population and one of the strategies that the government adopts is to deport illegal immigrants. There are various articles written concerning this issue, and one of them it the article by Julia Preston in The New York Times named U.S. Will Step Up Deportations, Focusing on Central Americans. The author argues that the Obama administration is promoting an increase in the number of deportations that mainly target children and mothers from Central America. Preston builds her credibility using convincing statistics and facts from trustworthy sources, she then uses logical explanations to stress the need for deportation, and finally reaches the readers’ minds by providing an emotional appeal and citing other participants of the conversation in order to support her argument.
In the article, Preston begins her narration by giving reasons why deportation has become the last resort for the government. She does this by providing statistics collected by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) that testify to a rising trend in illegal immigration in the country. She then continues to explain how the deportation process will occur. She states that it will not be a scenario that was experienced earlier in the year whereby the government raided the homes of the immigrants and then deported them. Instead, the immigration agents will speed up arrests of the illegal immigrants’ families, which already has been happening since the January raids. Preston adds the criteria which the government will use to arrest the illegal immigrants. She says that the deportation will be faced only by those who were caught at the border after January 1, 2014, were denied asylum by the courts, and were sentenced to deportation by the judge. Teenagers who turned 18 years of age while fighting deportation battles in courts are also eligible for trial since they have lost protection a children. Lastly, she outlines cases when families avoided deportation by seeking legal counsel from immigration advocates.
Throughout the entire essay, Preston uses various credible sources to support her claims and develop her argument, as well as appeals to ethos. These sources include statistics from the Department of Homeland Security, reports by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, and the opinion of various Congress leaders. The use of these sources to build her argument shows that Preston has studied the issue at hand in a correct manner by considering the statistics, as well as taking into account the opinion of the experts in the field. She then also introduces the views of the experts who hold a contradicting opinion to that of the government to show the sensitivity of the issue in question and how it affects a lot of people.
Aside from her ethos appeal, Preston also appeals to logos by deriving logical conclusions from the presented statistics. She addresses the issue of the increase in the number of illegal immigrants in the country. She explains why there is a need to sophisticate the current deportation policy, because such deportations would send a strict enforcement message to Central Americans as well as try to curb the seasonal swell of border crossing in the southwest part of the country. Preston offers statistics from the Department of Homeland Security that state that border crossings are usually high during the summer. The issue bringing concern is that during the fall there also was an unexpected rise in the number of border crossings. From these statistics, Preston brings out the need to curb illegal immigration using deportation.
After appealing to both ethos and logos, Preston then uses her appeal to pathos. However, the appeal to pathos in the middle section of her article weakens her argument since she uses emotional appeal from other people of a contrasting viewpoint. She quotes Senator Bernie Sanders, who describes deportation as inhumane since immigrant families are charged for fleeing from their homes that are sometimes the regions with horrendous violence. A statement by Hillary Clinton opposed the large-scale raids and added that they sow fear in the families of the immigrants who were only seeking relief in the United States. These two appeals of pathos tend to weaken the argument by Preston about deporting Central Americans.
In the final part of her article, Preston turns to ethos to strengthen her claims. She brings out the concern expressed by the government officials that there could be another summer influx of immigrants like the one observed in 2014. She continues to bring out the statistics by border patrol that say that during the first months of the year, illegal border crossings dropped, but a rise was observed after that. She adds that apprehension of families at the southwest border increased by 131% in six months to 32,117, and the detention of children who were unaccompanied by anyone rose by 78% to 27,754. She also quotes the secretary of the Department of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson, who says that the people of Central America should know that there is no open border in the United States. She concludes by quoting DHS spokeswoman Ms. Catron, who claims that Homeland’s highest priority is border security and public safety. This shows that illegal immigration is on the rise and is an issue that needs to be dealt with through deportation.
Although Preston begins her essay by convincing her readers using various statistics that illegal immigration is an issue that the country should deal with using deportation, she loses her credibility by using opinions from other citizens who do not support deportation for various reasons. Throughout the text, the readers can see the existence of the problem due to the different opinions of many experts. She finally drives the point home using remarks from DHS that there is no open border in the US and that their priority is border security and public safety. Deportation thereby becomes the only measure to deal aimed at stabilizing the current rise in the population.