Liam Brophy and John Engle of the Irish Debate Team debated against Mark Lopez-Trigo and Emily Bello-Pardo, members of the FIU Debate Society.
The motion debated was “this House believes that we should adopt an open border immigration policy.”
Brophy and Engle argued that the current immigration system is exploitative and racist. They further argued that it perpetuates a flawed conception of how the United States became what it is today as this has historically been “a nation of immigrants.” Brophy and Engle also stated that our conception of borders is artificial, so we should look for more sensible migratory alternatives.
They also highlighted a cosmopolitan conception of human rights as the best immigration policy. They reasoned that, if there is a human right to move freely, there is no reason why we should limit free movement of people between borders.
Bello-Pardo and Lopez-Trigo argued on the other hand, that the practical consequences of fostering a transition toward an open border world would create unavoidable consequences. They mentioned drug and human trafficking, terrorism, and national security concerns as reasons to avoid an open border policy. They argued in addition that, were the US to open up its borders, the flood of immigrants to the country would overwhelm our already fragile economy. It would also create a brain drain effect in the home countries of all these immigrants, and this brain drain would have overtly negative consequences in the developing world.
Once the debate had come to a close, Dr. Daniel Blaeuer opened the floor to the audience’s lively participation.
The round of focused cross-examinations and Rebuttal was ultimately won by the Irish. Congratulations to both teams for providing the audience with this thought provoking debate!
