FROM THE EDITOR: A Local Immigrant Defines the Best in America ...
... extremists left and right have failed to learn her lessons -- America has much to give those who come, and requires much of them.
By Martin Davis
EDITOR-IN-CHIEF
Email Martin
In the national debate over immigration, one set of voices is too rarely heard – those of people deported.
Adele Uphaus made a small, but significant, dent in that void on Monday when she interviewed Mirna Benitez, who was summoned to an off-hours’ meeting with ICE agents outside Richmond and never returned home.
Instead, Benitez spent 10 days in ICE custody being shuttled from Riverside Regional Jail in Richmond to ICE facilities in Texas and Louisiana. Finally, after 10 days she was deported to her native El Salvador.
Her story is nothing less than shocking in its inhumanity.
She reportedly was laughed at as she was placed in handcuffs and as the agents repeatedly tried, and failed, to get clean fingerprints.
Her “intimate parts” were searched, she claims, for hidden weapons
She said she was stuck on a cargo plane in Texas for five hours, in handcuffs, while an ICE agent and the pilot argued – the pilot was concerned about being told to fly despite concerns about technical issues. He eventually walked away.
She said she had to “shower” using a cup to dip water from a toilet.
She also said she had to “wash” her undergarments in that same toilet water.
With no way to dry her clothing after “washing” it, she said she had to put wet clothing back on.
Finally, she said her personal belongings and documents were soiled by water leaking from a toilet.
As Uphaus reports, Benitez “never encountered a single officer or agent who treated her with kindness and respect.”
At very least, Benitez is owed an apology. No one, regardless of citizenship status, deserves this type of treatment. We would hope that investigations would be opened into the ICE officers who carried out these acts so that they can be properly trained or dismissed.
Her story, however, goes far beyond the inhumane treatment she suffered.
Uphaus’ interview with Benitez, when read between the lines, points to unsettling questions about the ways we try to cram the immigration debate into poorly defined boxes, and what it says about the changing definition of what it means to be an American.
Open Borders vs. Legal Immigration
Benitez’s story is striking in the holes it exposes in the U.S. Immigration system, as it doesn’t fit neatly into a debate about open borders and legal immigration.
She came to the U.S. 13 years ago seeking asylum. At the time, El Salvador was recognized as a violent nation, with women in particular being vulnerable. Upon arrival, she was detained and given periodic appointments to attend. She secured a lawyer and began the process of applying for asylum.
Since that time, Benitez said that she “always followed through with all the instructions. Everything I was told to do, I made sure I did it…. I provided evidence for everything they asked of me.”
She stated, however, that delays in the process cost her the opportunity for asylum when her case finally landed in court. The judge reportedly said her case was “shocking” in the delays it had faced, which gave him no option but to deny the request. Then her lawyer supposedly failed to file her appeal without the appropriate supporting documents.
Through it all, she did what she legally needed to do to secure a job. She paid her taxes, and barring one minor traffic violation for which she paid a $30 fine, Benitez was never in legal trouble.
Based on these statements, Benitez came to the U.S. seeking asylum under a legitimate concern about violence, followed the rules, and was ultimately failed by an immigration system that is overwhelmed and grossly understaffed.
It’s not the story of someone exploiting open borders. Nor is it a story of someone trying to work around the legal system for immigrating to the United States.
Rather, it’s a classic example of the brokenness of the American immigration system and the need to seriously take on long-overdue reforms.
Who Is an American?
At its core, Benitez’s case raises an even more concerning question – Who is an American?
Based on the information that the Advance currently has at its disposal, while Benitez is not a U.S. citizen, she has for 13 years worked in good faith toward earning that status.
This places her in limbo, it does not make her a criminal or “illegal.”
What it means to be in limbo in America is a question that does not receive a great deal of attention. Perhaps that’s because until recently it hasn’t been hotly debated.
This fact was recently highlighted by an article in CNN:
In a 2014 joint interview, former Supreme Court justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Antonin Scalia were asked a pressing legal question about immigrant rights.
Do the five freedoms mentioned in the First Amendment – freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly and petition – apply to undocumented immigrants?
“Oh I think so, I think anybody who’s present in the United States has protections under the United States Constitution,” said Scalia, the reliable conservative voice.
Ginsburg, the stalwart liberal, agreed.
“When we get to the 14th Amendment, it doesn’t speak of ‘citizens.’ Some constitutions grant rights to ‘citizens,’ but our constitution says ‘person,’” she said. “And the ‘person’ is every person who is here – documented or undocumented.”
How we have moved from a place where conservatives and liberals alike defended the rights of immigrants to one where someone like Benitez can be rounded up, ridiculed, treated in a manner that is unbefitting of any human being needs to be a point of broad discussion in our society.
Where to begin that discussion? We can start here.
Benitez was born into a violent society, sought safety and freedom in America, drank from the waters of freedom and made a life for herself that gave her daughter opportunities she could not have had in El Salvador, and gave back to her community through service and relationships.
For that work, for following the rules that were given to her to become a citizen, and for being responsive to federal agents’ requests to check in, Benitez was rewarded with showering in a toilet and enduring the ridicule of her arrestors.
Despite all of that, Benitez today sits in El Salvador working again to return to America.
Why would she want to return?
Perhaps because Benitez understands something about America that many of us, left and right, have forgotten.
America – for all its troubles – still stands as a beacon of hope and still reigns as a land of opportunity. And America asks something of anyone who comes here — everyone who comes to these shores must not just take from its riches, but they must actively help to grow its abundance.
The left-wing and right-wing extremists in America — those most vocal, volatile, and often uninformed people who seem to constitute a greater and greater percentage of our populace — have lost sight of this.
Worse, they have no vested interest in reclaiming it. Their power rests in contemptuous argument not thoughtful debate.
Their numbers may be growing, but there is a quiet middle that is finding its voice. This middle is comprised of Democrats and Republicans, rich and poor, men and women, and people from across the country’s cultural expanse.
They’re grounded in reasoned debate, not self-righteous anger; they respect those who differ, not demand ideological purity.
Most of all, they are grounded in mutual respect for the ideals America has long represented. The very ideals that Benitez sees more clearly than many “real” Americans do today.
It’s time for the quiet middle to force this conversation.
Local Obituaries
To view local obituaries or to send a note to family and loved ones, please visit the link that follows.
Support Award-winning, Locally Focused Journalism
The FXBG Advance cuts through the talking points to deliver both incisive and informative news about the issues, people, and organizations that daily affect your life. And we do it in a multi-partisan format that has no equal in this region. Over the past year, our reporting was:
First to break the story of Stafford Board of Supervisors dismissing a citizen library board member for “misconduct,” without informing the citizen or explaining what the person allegedly did wrong.
First to explain falling water levels in the Rappahannock Canal.
First to detail controversial traffic numbers submitted by Stafford staff on the Buc-ee’s project
Our media group also offers the most-extensive election coverage in the region and regular columnists like:
And our newsroom is led by the most-experienced and most-awarded journalists in the region — Adele Uphaus (Managing Editor and multiple VPA award-winner) and Martin Davis (Editor-in-Chief, 2022 Opinion Writer of the Year in Virginia and more than 25 years reporting from around the country and the world).
For just $8 a month, you can help support top-flight journalism that puts people over policies.
Your contributions 100% support our journalists.
Help us as we continue to grow!
This article is published under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND. It can be distributed for noncommercial purposes and must include the following: “Published with permission by FXBG Advance.”
"What a field day for the heat (Ooh ooh ooh)
A thousand people in the street (Ooh ooh ooh)
Singing songs and they carrying signs (Ooh ooh ooh)
Mostly say, "Hooray for our side" (Ooh ooh ooh)..."
For What Its Worth
Buffalo Springfield
Most would, like Mr Davis, consider this a condemnation of "extremists" - whether they be right or left. Only the holy "middle" is right.
Some truth to it. To a degree.
Though, as per usual, he misses the point due to his insistence on equivalency.
He writes an article that squarely notes horrendous actions from - not right wing extremists - but the very core policies of the Republican party.
Just as Jeff Sessions explained during the 1st Trump administration when they were separating immigrant infants and children from their parents and caging them in inhumane conditions, out of view - the torture and inhumanity of that policy WAS the point.
No secret.
Why are you now surprised?
As they correctly pointed out, such housing had been done before, as recently as President Obama's administration - but then, it was due to being part of a system starved for resources that was overrun and doing the best they could with what they had.
So it was not that it was happening, though one could argue that, again - Republicans starving that system of funds while refusing to engage in substantive resolution of systemic economic serfdom, if not slavery, WAS the solution; the action by Republicans during the time of Sessions was something new.
In that it progressed from deliberate indifference to open malicious intent. It was, and therefore, is, no secret.
Yes, it may be born of racism, ignorance, xenophobic fear, and manipulation by those who are benefiting the most from its existence - which just happens to be those spending the most on lobbyists, influence, media, etc. - to continue it; but however how we got here - those people made a clear choice in the fall of 2024.
They are not the "extremists" of the Republican party. They are the Republican party.
Meanwhile, he equally condemns the "extremists" of the "left" - while never clearly defining who they are, or what they've done wrong - beyond saying that what's wrong is wrong, and what's right is right.
Just clearly cajoling us and dismissing us because we make such a distinction.
Including those of us who, unlike him are willing to openly condemn those perpetuating and supporting such policies and holding them accountable for these wrong acts that has led to not only to the harm and injustice to his friend, but also to the millions who have been suffering as much, or worse, who didn't have the joy of his acquaintance; as being equally at fault for them existing.
Why?
How is being openly against injustice wrong? That is never explained in his editorials. Yet is given as axiom upon the rest of the editorial is built.
Pillars of sand in my book.
He openly condemns those within such a system for acting with cruelty when, again, the Republican party which has just increased ICE funding by billions, had masked police shoot a US citizen, is increasing the number of armed men they are sending to occupy cities that do not bend to their will, at the same time we threaten war to Iran for doing the same to their citizens.
Oh, and as they threaten to steal from our allies while giving other totalitarians permission to do the same.
And anyone condemning those things is an extremist because they are willing to say they are wrong?
That don't make sense.
Jesus Christ, Marcus Aurelius, Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, Hugh Mercer, Frederick Douglass, Gandhi, MLK, HW Bush, Desmond Tutu, Pope Francis, Pope Leo; our history is filled with those who were willing to openly have principles of decency and honesty which compelled and compels them to stand on those principles.
Make choices as you see fit, but that is the company I hope to join. Committed to truth and principles of decency and honesty.
Today's Republican party, and through them being our current freely chosen leaders, our nation as a whole - is out of balance. We've lost our shadow, our honor, and our soul.
If seeing that and saying that, rather than pretending otherwise, when so much evidence is there to show it - is wrong, I don't want to be right.
Maybe realist would be a better description of those of us against such injustice than a classification as "extremists" equally at fault for the injustice being done here. To your friend and so many others.
Eh?
" You can choose a ready guide in some celestial voice
If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice
You can choose from phantom fears and kindness that can kill
I will choose a path that's clear, I will choose free will..."
Rush
Freewill
You call it extremism, I call it honesty.
Moving on. 'Til the next apologia for apathy is published.
What Cousin Leo just wrote: "They are not the 'extremists' of the Republican party. They ARE the Republican party.
"Meanwhile, he equally condemns the 'extremists' of the 'left' - while never clearly defining who they are, or what they've done wrong - beyond saying that what's wrong is wrong, and what's right is right."