I recently learned that several counties are hoping to leave our state. While this seems legally dubious, the sentiment behind this move concerns me as an Illinoisian and I take it seriously.
I am a relatively new resident of Illinois and Springfield, but I have a lot of love for this place. I love the reminders of Abraham Lincoln and other local heroes and the decency of so many of the people I have encountered in cities, villages and small towns I have met as I explore this beautiful state.
Living near downtown Springfield, I saw something of a sign war during the election – it is clear that my neighborhood is politically mixed. I have my own feelings about the outcome of the election as a citizen, political scientist and public university professor, and I have exercised my right to share those freely in my public writings and interviews. I also genuinely hope we can take a page from Lincoln’s book and remember that we are meant to be united.
When Lincoln was running for president, voters in Sangamon County did not support him. However, his image and words are now emblazoned and invoked across our country – especially here in the “Land of Lincoln.” Since I moved to Illinois, I have thought about Lincoln on a daily basis. I am currently reading The House of Lincoln by Nancy Horan, and I visit Lincoln’s Tomb in Oak Ridge Cemetery often. I’d like to think that – if I had been there – I would have supported Lincoln. Of course, as a woman, I would not have had the right to vote.
Unity does not mean compromising our most deeply held beliefs. For example, I am unwavering in my support of immigrants. I believe that immigrants represent the industrious, creative and welcoming spirit of America. While I agree with many of my neighbors that our immigration system is broken, we must reject cruelty in the treatment of noncitizens. Noncitizens are, after all, protected by most of the individual rights laid out in the Constitution with the exceptions of the right to vote in federal elections or running for federal office.
Lincoln supported immigrants, too, by befriending and hiring them even during a time of great national anti-immigrant sentiment. At the time, a resident sent a poem to the Illinois State Journal to express support for immigrants. Sharing our opinion, even when it is not the most popular, and telling the truth, even when you are not in power, are hallmarks of our democracy.
I’m worried about the cracks in our state, our nation and our confidence in our neighbors. But I won’t give up in my efforts to preserve our Union or striving to make it more perfect.
As Lincoln himself put it: “The public interest and my private interest have been perfectly parallel, because in no other way could I serve myself so well, as by truly serving the Union.”
Isabel Skinner is an assistant professor in the School of Politics and International Affairs at University of Illinois Springfield and a public voices fellow with The OpEd Project.
This article appears in Springfield grapples with increased crime.
ngl this comes off like “good people on both sides” type of rhetoric.
Tolerating the intolerant allows them to use their freedom to undermine the tolerant society, through coercion, violence, or manipulation of democratic systems.
Hello “Professor”,
You wrote, “While I agree with many of my neighbors that our immigration system is broken, we must reject cruelty in the treatment of noncitizens.”
You wrote in a different op-ed for “Ms Magazine” that you are “deeply troubled by the anti-immigrant right-wing populist message that Trump ran on and what it means for this country”.
So, do you agree with your neighbors or are you “deeply troubled” by them?
Does UIS teach students that lying is wrong? Or is lying perfectly fine when you’re trying to achieve your political goals?
Donald Trump didn’t mince words when he said he would carry out the largest deportation operation in history. It’s weasel behavior to pretend that you agree with the people who voted for that. It’s obvious from your other writings that you completely disagree with your neighbors.
What do you mean when you say “we must reject cruelty”?
Is enforcing the immigration laws which have been on the books for 75 years an example of “cruelty”?
You also wrote, “Noncitizens are, after all, protected by most of the individual rights laid out in the Constitution with the exceptions of the right to vote in federal elections or running for federal office.”
Conflating “noncitizens” and “illegal aliens” is another example of weasel behavior. Shame on you. Donald Trump has NEVER said or even implied that his immigration policy would affect green card holders.
“Noncitizens” are guilty of a federal crime and subject to deportation when they enter the US outside of a designated port of entry, when they overstay their visa, or when they lie about their status as a refugee seeking asylum.
Do you allow your students to be as slippery as you are with their use of the English language?
I would suggest that you need more practice telling the truth before you continue comparing yourself to Abraham Lincoln.
In all honesty, no one has a problem with immigrants. You know this. The individuals you are actually referring to are “Illegal aliens” – a foreign national who is living without official authorization in a country of which they are not a citizen. As a professor you should be aware of how important distinctions are. I doubt you are obtuse so the only conclusion left is disingenuous. The immigration system is flawed but the solution is to correct the issues not completely ignoring the current laws. As a professor I am sure you are aware of the amnesty for illegal aliens that was passed decades ago. With that legislation was the promise of a secure border. Time warp from 1986 to 2020 and yet again the citizens of this country are supposed to accept amnesty one more time, with again, zero border enforcement. Those who enter this country are welcomed warmly. Those, whose first act is to violate immigration law, show zero respect for the values this country stands for. Deporting those who violate the laws is not cruel. Without secure borders there is no country.
Apparently this professor can’t understand the difference between “illegal immigrants” and “legal immigrants”. Her opinion article here is titled “Preserving our Union”. No one I know is against legal immigration, but knowingly allowing millions of immigrants into this country illegally will no doubt have exactly the opposite effect of “Preserving our Union”. Her word salad here is ridiculous, IMO.