From CBS News, some news and a rewrite of history as to “immigration reform”:

A bipartisan group of leading senators has reached agreement on the principles of sweeping legislation to rewrite the nation’s immigration laws.

The deal, which was to be announced at a news conference Monday afternoon, covers border security, guest workers and employer verification, as well as a path to citizenship for the 11 million illegal immigrants already in the United States.

Although thorny details remain to be negotiated and success is far from certain, the development heralds the start of what could be the most significant effort in years toward overhauling the nation’s inefficient patchwork of immigration laws….

The eight senators expected to endorse the new principles Monday are Democrats Charles Schumer of New York, Dick Durbin of Illinois, Robert Menendez of New Jersey and Michael Bennet of Colorado; and Republicans John McCain of Arizona, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Marco Rubio of Florida and Jeff Flake of Arizona….

Several of these lawmakers have worked for years on the issue. McCain collaborated with the late Democratic Sen. Edward M. Kennedy on comprehensive immigration legislation pushed by then-President George W. Bush in 2007, only to see it collapse in the Senate when it couldn’t get enough GOP support.

That last paragraph is a rewrite of history.  Immigration reform was killed because of poison pills put in the legislation by Democrats (including Barack Obama) supported by some Republicans (including Jim DeMint).  Just another example of how the media, out of ignorance or worse, skews history to blame Republicans.

How big a payday this is for immigration crime depends on what the pathway to citizenship ends up being.

Regardless, it’s a payday because people who violated our laws to get here get to stay without consequence and get a pathway to citizenship.  That pathway takes immigration reform from some sort of humanitarian and practical solution to rewarding illegality.

It makes suckers of all the people who followed the rules and are on the other side of the borders and oceans because they didn’t want to become criminals.

Once again we send the message that immigration crime pays.  Apparently that is good politics.

Question of the Day — Will violators of gun laws not connected to commission of some other crime be given amnesty like immigration law violators?  Or are 2nd Amendment rights not equal to squatters’ rights?

Update:  By the way, the comparison to squatters’ rights is not something I thought up, it’s a theory advanced by former Cornell (and now U. Chicago) law professor Eduardo Peñalver, who has written a book on the contribution of squatters to the development of property law, and who views application of such theories as a positive development as related to immigration law:

The better analogy is with the twin doctrines of adverse possession and prescription. These doctrines, which are virtually universal in systems of private property, recognize that possession or use of property that goes on for a long enough period of time should eventually be recognized as legal, even if they were illegal when they began. In most states, even an act of intentional squatting will ripen into full-blown property ownership after roughly seven to ten years.