Statue of Liberty, New York, New York. Image by PublicDomainPictures/Pixabay.
Thomas Plante (@ThomasPlante) is the Augustin Cardinal Bea, SJ University Professor, professor of psychology and, by courtesy, religious studies at Santa Clara University and an emeritus adjunct professor of psychiatry at Stanford University School of Medicine. He has been a scholar of the Markkula Center for more than 25 years. Views are his own.
Perhaps the most critical foundational question in moral philosophy and applied ethics is, “Who am I and how do I want to be in the world?” Our daily actions are answers to this important question, whether we are intentional or not in our response. In recent months, the Trump administration has aggressively pursued people who they suspect are in the country illegally. They have rounded up mostly people of color in primarily democratic leaning communities and, without legal representation or due process, sent them to detention centers with demeaning nicknames such as, Alligator Alley, Cornhusker Clink, Louisiana Lockup, Speedway Slammer, and Deportation Depot.
Many have been moved to prisons overseas such as in El Salvador. The detainees are often described in dehumanizing terms such as “aliens, animals, stone-cold killers,” and so forth. Families have been separated, people have been imprisoned without legal assistance or defense, and media have been prohibited from talking with the detainees or visiting the facilities. These actions answer the ethical question of who we are and want to be in the world on a national scale. While plenty of people may be appalled and horrified by these developments, they are indicative of what our nation’s current leaders in power say who we are and how we want to be in the world now.
There are many different approaches to consider and reflect upon when addressing ethical issues. Many centuries of writing in moral philosophy and applied ethics have offered numerous helpful strategies to help solve ethical challenges. These generally fall into two broad categories: the deontological approach and the consequentialist approach. Deontological strategies seek to help us perform right actions and correct duties without attending to the consequences of our actions (e.g., be honest at all times) while the consequentialist approach helps to secure right solutions and outcomes (e.g., people will trust you if you are always honest). More specifically, these various approaches to ethical decision making are fine-tuned and nuanced to include specific approaches such as the utilitarian, justice, common good, virtue, rights, egoism, and natural law among several other lens for us to consider and wrestle with ethical dilemmas.
When ethical problems emerge, thoughtful consideration of these various ethical approaches are needed to determine the best course of action that maximizes a satisfying and hopefully good outcome. Typically, conflicts may emerge when different people lean on different preferred ethical strategies but most often these conflicts emerge between two competing viewpoints: egoism and the common good, for example. Thus, most ethical conflicts and dilemma are basically understood in terms of what is in my best interest versus the best interest of others.
While most reasonable, informed, and honest people would likely admit that our current immigration policies and procedures could be improved acknowledging the tensions between welcoming immigrants freely and concerns about open-border policies. There are rational and good-faith diverging views about how best to accomplish healthy and productive national goals regarding immigrants and refugees.
Here at Santa Clara University, a Jesuit and Catholic higher education institution, we highlight certain ethical and religious perspectives to guide our decisions. Our core values include the four C’s: competence, conscience, compassion, and community. These values would suggest that we would hope that those most competent in immigration matters would help guide us all in helpful solutions. These professionals might include immigration lawyers, psychologists, social workers, physicians and other health care professionals, city planners, and politicians of good will among others. Our value of conscience means that we try to solve problems ethically, with reason and thoughtful principles in mind, and use whatever ethical tools are available to do so. Certainly, our value of compassion would suggest that we treat everyone with care, including those who are marginalized, poor, and struggling. Our value of community highlights that we are not only acting in self interest but with the common good and the entire community in mind. These values help us to think through many diverse ethical challenges including current immigration policies and procedures.
As a Catholic and Jesuit university, we also are interested in the wisdom of sacred scripture and our 2,000-year-old religious tradition as well. When it comes to immigration, there are numerous scriptural passages from the Judeo-Christian tradition that speak to how to best interact with immigrants and potential immigrants. They all seem to sing the same song. Some examples follow:
“When a stranger sojourn with you in your land, you shall not do him wrong. you shall treat the stranger who sojourns with you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt." (Leviticus 19:33-34)
“Cursed is anyone who withholds justice from the foreigner, the fatherless or the widow.” (Deuteronomy 27:19)
“The Lord watches over the strangers; he upholds the orphan and the widow, but the way of the wicked he brings to ruin.” (Psalm 146:9)
“I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me.” (Matthew 25:35)
“… Extend hospitality to strangers.” (Romans 12:13)
“Let mutual love continue. Do not neglect to show hospitality to strangers, for by doing that some have entertained angels without knowing it. Remember those who are in prison, as though you were in prison with them; those who are being tortured, as though you yourselves were being tortured.” (Hebrews 13:1-3)
Additionally, Pope Francis’ encyclical, Fratelli Tutti, calls for a global fraternity and social friendship to help create a more just and peaceful world. It speaks to the intrinsic dignity of every person and a collective responsibility to care for one another, especially migrants and the poor, to overcome the global ills of division, individualism, and indifference. Using the parable of the Good Samaritan from the Gospel of Luke (10:25-37), the encyclical promotes a "civilization of love" and dialogue as essential for a society that includes and uplifts everyone.
Thus, from both an ethical and religious perspective, it is reasonable to conclude that immigrants should be treated with respect, dignity, compassion, and even love. While reasonable people may disagree about the best practical strategies to manage immigration and deportation, certainly a complicated issue with many important implications and consequences to consider, these core principles should be considered and followed at all times.
So, how should we answer the critical and foundational ethical question, “Who are you and how do you want to be in the world?” How should we answer this question given our current approach to immigration and deportations? How can we encourage those in current leadership and power positions to reflect upon these principles and guidelines and then act accordingly? How can we appeal to the better angels of their nature in doing so?