September 8, 2025

By Grant Van Leuven

One thing I am impressed to remark on is its seventh of many grievances listed to warrant leaving England against what was viewed as the monarch’s tyrannical oppression.  Though this lament of the Declaration is incredibly relevant to discussions about immigration in the U.S., I have observed so far that no one of varying viewpoints seems to be aware of it–and some, perhaps, may prefer ignorance bound to unnecessarily restrictive narratives of either hagiography or anachronism. Nonetheless, this article is an intended contribution by providing that reference point and others for proper factual and Biblical balance within admittedly complicated conversations (and has been reviewed and approved by our Session). The Declaration’s seventh grievance reads:

He [King George III] has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither …¹[Emphasis added.]²

Source: The U.S. Declaration of Independence (Seventh Grievance).

This complaint comes after the renown prefatory clause, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights” and within its main body of protests against “The history of the present King of Great Britain [being] a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States.”³

As a bi-vocational pastor employed by World Relief Southern California—a Christian humanitarian organization partnering with churches to welcome our new immigrant neighbors and help them belong in our communities, this urgent recognition of the essential economic impact of U.S. immigration on the nation’s formation is striking.  It has timeless and timely relevance regarding our country’s immigration policies and its economic progress today.

In fact, a study by Stephen Moore, an economist who has worked for the Heritage Foundation and the Cato Institute, suggests that the average immigrant (regardless of legal status) pays about $80,000 more in taxes than they receive in benefits over a lifetime.⁴

Source: Welcoming the Stranger: Justice, Compassion, & Truth in the Immigration Debate: Revised and Expanded (Sorens and Yang).

More on the Declaration’s seventh grievance:  “The first part … deals with Parliament revoking the Plantation Act of 1740, in 1773 [which] had given each colony the right to enact laws for naturalizing immigrants”;⁵ in particular, “There had been a large influx of German immigrants … and the King wanted to discourage such … concerned over … the widespread popularity of republican ideals among German immigrants.”⁶ The result was nearly zero immigration by the revolution’s start.⁷

Professor of Law at George Mason University and the B. Kenneth Simon Chair in Constitutional Studies at the Cato Institute, Ilya Somin explains that “This complaint against the King was aimed at a series of royal orders issued in 1772 and 1773, which forbade the colonies from naturalizing aliens, banned the passage of any laws facilitating that purpose, including laws promoting migration, and overrode a North Carolina law exempting immigrants from Europe from taxation for a period of four years.”⁸  Additionally, he points out that

The King’s efforts to restrict immigration to Britain’s American colonies were not just a flawed policy, the Declaration claims, but a step towards the “establishment of an absolute Tyranny.”

Nor was it merely a tyranny over the colonial governments’ supposed right to determine immigration policy for themselves. It was also a tyrannical action towards the would-be immigrants.⁹

Source: “Immigration and the Principles of the Declaration of Independence: The principles of the Declaration of Independence and the American Revolution justify free migration rights” (Ilya Somin).

With self-preserving interest to sustain the U.S. economy alone, immigrants should still be appreciated with reasonable concerns that Social Security in America might dry up.  In their book, Welcoming the Stranger: Justice, Compassion, & Truth in the Immigration Debate (Revised and Expanded), World Relief’s Matthew Soerens and Jenny Yang instruct that

In the next few decades … because of an aging native-born population and low fertility rates, the number of elderly will increase more rapidly than the number of children or working-age adults.  Future immigrants and their descendants will account for the only growth in the working-age population of adults between ages eighteen to sixty-four … A greater number of retired dependents will thus need to be supported by a worker who can pay into the Social Security and healthcare systems.¹⁰

Source: Welcoming the Stranger.

Earlier this year, a large San Diego hotel and convention center reached out to our World Relief office to develop a flow of job applications from refugee clients and has expressed concerns about staffing needs to meet business demands without ample immigrant interviewees.  And a leader in a company headquartered here constructing high-level housing developments throughout major U.S. markets conveyed apprehension about lacking sufficient immigrant employees which would slow progress and increase expenses for consumers.

Thankfully, USA Today recently reported an acknowledgment and anticipated adjustment by our president that, “Our great Farmers and people in the Hotel and Leisure business have been stating that our very aggressive policy on immigration is taking very good, long time workers away from them, with those jobs being almost impossible to replace … This is not good … Changes are coming!”¹¹

Soerens and Yang summarize the situation:

Given the need for an ever-increasing labor market, almost all economists agree that immigration (whether legal or illegal) provides and will continue to provide a net benefit to the economy of the United States [and] that “on balance, immigration is good for the country.  Immigrants provide scarce labor, which lowers prices in much the same way global trade does.  And overall, the newcomers modestly raise Americans’ per capita income.”¹²

Source: Welcoming the Stranger.

As Soerens has elsewhere emphasized, when discussing the cost of immigrants to the United States we must also discuss their contribution to our country.  And rather than thinking of them as competition for jobs we should better recognize they are complementing preferred job stimulus for citizens. (To view a brief, excellent video of Matthew Soerens speaking on the relation of immigration to the U.S. economy as well as to other common concerns such as crime, drugs, the border, and legality, visit this link.) Further:

Immigrants often are entrepreneurs and [start up] businesses that would otherwise not exist, offering services in communities, employing other workers, and overall increasing the Gross Domestic Product of the US economy … The US labor market has an incredible ability to absorb new workers.  Immigrants do not further split up the economic pie; they enlarge it.¹³

Source: Welcoming the Stranger.

It is important for Christians—especially Reformed and confessional upholding “Sola Scriptura,” mainly to recognize the inherent Scriptural value of immigrants as made in the image of God Who often calls His people to reflect Him in countenancing and caring for strangers as our neighbors.  Such as

Deuteronomy 10:18-19: He [God] doth execute the judgment of the fatherless and widow, and loveth the stranger, in giving him food and raiment. Love ye therefore the stranger: for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.¹⁴ [Emphasis added.]

Note that, while there are some technical and legal nuances in contemporary usage, the word “stranger” in this translation per myriad Old Testament Hebrew (and related New Testament terms in Greek) lexicons, along with modern dictionaries and common use, could be appropriately substituted with such synonyms as guest, sojourner, alien, foreigner, immigrant, outsider, or newcomer–and sometimes, wayfarer. This is how I have explained the word in sermons on such texts. Particularly interesting is that the word “guest” is sometimes first or only offered as the English word to use in Bible glossaries, and this with how God is said to consider and care for immigrants is important to meditate upon by citizens of the kingdom of heaven with opportunity to influence their earthly realms.

God usually groups strangers with orphans and widows in Scripture—the common theme being they are especially vulnerable to neglect or unjust oppression in society and thus should be proactively protected by it.  Consider also what Jesus says of Leviticus 19:18 in Matthew 22:39, “Love thy neighbor as thyself,” with the question in Luke 10:25-37, “Who is my neighbor?” (remembering the Good Samaritan was a foreigner) and that God commands in

Leviticus 19:33-34:  …if a stranger sojourn with thee in your land, ye shall not vex him.  But the stranger that dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself; for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the LORD your God.  [Emphasis added.]

The above underlined should give pause to altering the U.S. Constitution as well as caution some eisegegetical connections to tribal borders within the Old Testament’s theocracy that make exaggerated application of them for influencing contemporary Christian attitudes and advising on modern immigration policies.  As well, noting the motivational refrain of remembering where we came from in such passages, let us recall that most citizens of this young nation are such by way of immigration in their own family histories; in fact, “Today an estimated one-third of all Americans can trace their ancestry to immigrants who entered the United States through Ellis Island.”¹⁵ In addition, all Christians join the hall of faith in Hebrews 11 as strangers on pilgrimage through this world waiting to cross over into their international eternal inheritance.

While chapter nineteen of the Westminster Confession of Faith instructs us to recognize the typology of the Old Testament’s ceremonial and judicial laws as largely fulfilled and finalized in Christ, it also counsels their moral equity remains.  Thus, it seems unlikely that an ongoing New Testament application would exclude a concern to welcome and shelter strangers within our “one nation under God,”¹⁶ especially with implications connected per above with how pure religion is partly described in James 1:27 and the potential of serving Jesus and entertaining angels per Matthew 25:35 and Hebrews 13:2.  It also is worth considering that God required a special tithe every three years to help ensure that the most at risk in every territory were able to eat, which included additional local support of the Levitical priests along with the standard Scriptural focus on providing for orphans, widows, and again–strangers in Deuteronomy 14:28-29 (see also Deuteronomy 26:12-13 and Amos 4:4).

Appealing for updating our immigration system to be Biblically wise and responsible, Soerens and Yang assert that

Christians who advocate for immigration reform are not elevating compassion over the rule of law, but seeking solutions that would restore the rule of law, while also keeping families unified and affirming the inherent human dignity of all people … proposals along these lines … would, as pastor and author John Piper says, both “give honor to the law and show mercy to the immigrants, whose situations are so varied and so many.”¹⁷

Source: Welcoming the Stranger.

Redemptive-historical and systematic studies of the Bible show it is replete with guiding God’s people on how a nation’s citizens should treat its sojourners.  To survey an impressive sample, see the Evangelical Immigration Table’s free online “I Was a Stranger: 40 Days of Scripture and Prayer cards.”¹⁸

Sadly, a 2025 Lifeway Research survey “found that just 23 percent of evangelical Christians say their views on the arrival of immigrants are primarily informed by the Bible.”¹⁹  Earlier, a 2015 Lifeway Research study determined “that the media has more influence on the average evangelical’s thinking on immigration than the Bible or the local church.”²⁰

Therefore, it also is important to heed the counsel of Orthodox Presbyterian Church minister Dr. Carl Trueman—himself an English immigrant and naturalized U.S. Citizen,²¹ in his book, Republocrat:

When it comes to listening to the news, Christians should be eclectic in their approach and not depend merely on those pundits who simply confirm their view of the world while self-evidently using terminology, logic, and standard rules of evidence and argumentation in sloppy, tendentious, and sometimes frankly dishonest ways … There is a sense in which we are dependent for our view of the wider world on those media that give us access to the world, so … make sure that we expose ourselves to a variety of viewpoints on the great issues of the day.²²

Source: Republocrat: Confessions of a Liberal Conservative (Carl Trueman).

My college rhetorical criticism and speech professor once said that the media doesn’t tell us what to think, but it does tell us what to think about.  Truly, any one news outlet can’t be unselective with its angle nor its selection.  So Trueman belabors:  “It is incumbent on us not to surround ourselves with things that confirm our prejudices but to seek to listen to a variety of viewpoints … to make as sure as humanly possible that you are seeing the issues in all their complexity … be the best and most informed and thoughtful citizens there are, not those whose stock-in-trade are clichés, slander, and lunatic conspiracy theories.”²³ (To listen to Dr. Trueman having an excellent discussion about the topic of immigration earlier this year with his Presbyterian Church in America pastor program co-host, Rev. Todd Pruitt, click here for their Mortification of Spin podcast post: alliancenet.org/episode/the-order-of-love.)

Returning to our focus on the economic value of immigration to the United States as so declared at its birth and still now growing, Soerens and Yang note: “ … most immigrants are paying taxes—taken out of their payroll checks for Social Security, Medicare, and income tax, as well as sales tax and property taxes … In 2010 alone, undocumented immigrants paid $12 billion more in payroll taxes into the Social Security Trust Funds than what they qualified to receive in benefits.”²⁴ [Emphasis added.] This noted, while not suggesting anything specific, one wonders if our nation’s mass, sometimes reckless sweeping of the hand deportation procedures will end up shooting itself in the foot.

What’s more, “More than $775 billion in revenue, $125 billion in payroll, and $100 billion in income is generated by immigrant-owned businesses, and those businesses employ one out of every ten workers.”²⁵  Large job-creating companies reflecting close immigrant heritage include Apple, AT&T, Boeing, Disney, General Electric, Google, McDonald’s²⁶, and Tesla.

Soerens highlights:

• 45 percent of Fortune 500 companies in the U.S. were founded or cofounded by a refugee or other immigrant or their children (American Immigration Council);
• 20 years after arrival, the average refugee adult has contributed approximately $21,000 more in taxes than they have received in governmental assistance and services at all levels (University of Notre Dame);
• An extensive study by The National Academies of the Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine concludes that immigration has an overall positive long-term impact on economic growth in the U.S.²⁷

Immigration’s economic value for the formation of the United States continues today.  Economist John Stapelford writes, “Immigration is one of the major reasons why the U.S. economy is so robust, diverse, dynamic and resilient.  This is not to minimize the negative impacts immigration can have on particular workers, families or communities.  But, in general, U.S. policy should be supportive of, rather than resistant to, immigration.”²⁸

Ilya Somin qualifies that the signers of the Declaration weren’t just looking at immigrants with dollar signs in their eyes.  They also had a heartbeat for them.

Many of the leaders of the American Revolution saw the new nation as a refuge for the oppressed of the world … George Washington stated that one of the reasons the United States was founded was to create “an Asylum for the poor and oppressed of all nations and religions.”²⁹ He expressed similar views … to a group of newly arrived Irish immigrants that “[t]he bosom of America is open to receive not only the opulent & respectable Stranger, but the oppressed & persecuted of all Nations & Religions.”³⁰

Thomas Jefferson, the principal author of the Declaration, similarly wrote, in 1781, that “It [has] been the wise policy of these states to extend the protection of their laws to all those who should settle among them of whatever nation or religion they might be and to admit them to a participation of the benefits of civil and religious freedom.”³¹ Other leading Founders expressed similar sentiments …³²

Source: “Immigration and the Principles of the Declaration of Independence.”

Especially germane to recent events is Somin’s assertion that

…The Founders established a Constitution under which, Madison and most others argued, the federal government had no general power to exclude immigrants.  When the Federalist Party pushed through the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798, giving the president broad power to deport immigrants he deemed “dangerous,” Jefferson and Madison denounced the law as both unjust and unconstitutional. They and their allies mobilized such strong resistance … that the federal government never actually managed to deport anyone under it.  [Emphasis added.]

… When Jefferson became president in 1801, he allowed the Act to expire, and federal immigration policy remained almost completely free of restrictions … The successful resistance to the Alien Acts was a triumph for liberty and equality that deserves to be far better known than it currently is.³³ [Emphasis added.]

Source: “Immigration and the Principles of the Declaration of Independence.”

Not that the Declaration and the U.S. experiment were perfect.  But it was an effort of “We the People of the United States … to form a more perfect Union,” as the Constitution’s Preamble expresses—and that other foundational document included its own amending ability on which we build within its fifth article.³⁴  Somin disclaims and proclaims:

None of this proves that America’s founding generation was free of prejudices against immigrants …

… But despite … unjust limitations, the principles of the Declaration of Independence did lead to the establishment of a nation that, for the first century of its history, had very few limitations on immigration, and thus became a refuge for millions of people fleeing poverty and tyranny.³⁵

Source: “Immigration and the Principles of the Declaration of Independence.”

This declaratory instinct set the stage for future generations to flourish.  Somin continues:

… Abraham Lincoln, who was a strong supporter of open immigration,³⁶ also saw the connection between immigrant rights and the Declaration of Independence:

“When [immigrants] look through that old Declaration of Independence, they find  … and … feel … that they have a right to claim it as though they were blood of the blood, and flesh of the flesh, of the men who wrote that Declaration; and so they are.”³⁷

…The America of the Founding era and of Lincoln’s day didn’t fully live up [to] these high ideals … But, at its best, the nation has indeed been a refuge for the oppressed, and they have been major contributors to its growth and success. Immigrants and natives alike³⁸ have much to gain from a more consistent adherence to the principles of the Declaration of Independence.³⁹ [Emphasis added.]

Source: “Immigration and the Principles of the Declaration of Independence.”

A portrait of the oft-revered “father of conservatism”—previous CA Governor and U.S. President Ronald Reagan, was first hung in the Oval Office earlier this year by President Donald J. Trump.  Some of Reagan’s words in his “Statement on United States Immigration and Refugee Policy, July 30, 1981”⁴⁰ are still worthy of consideration:

Our nation is a nation of immigrants. More than any other country, our strength comes from our own immigrant heritage and our capacity to welcome those from other lands.

… Those who have established equities in the United States should be recognized and accorded legal status. At the same time, in so doing, we must not encourage illegal immigration.

… Immigration and refugee policy is an important part of our past and fundamental to our national interest.⁴¹

Source: “Statement on United States Immigration and Refugee Policy, July 30, 1981” (Ronald Reagan).

Source of photo: Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation & Institute.

It is no surprise that the Declaration of Independence proclaimed the economic and fundamental value of U.S. immigration.⁴²  It had its own heritage:  “Since the time of the Puritans, who emigrated from northern Europe seeking religious freedom in the West, immigration has defined the United States as a country … any debate on immigration should be couched within the premise that immigration has built this country into what it is today.”⁴³

Grant Van Leuven has been feeding the flock at thePuritan Reformed Presbyterian Church in San Diego, CA, since 2010.  A bi-vocational pastor, he also serves as Site Manager of the San Diego County office for World Relief Southern California.  Grant and his wife, Fernanda, have eight covenant children.  He earned his M.Div. at the Reformed Presbyterian Theological Seminary in Pittsburgh, PA.

---

Footnotes

1. gov/founding-docs/declaration-transcript ↩︎
2. Relevant though not primary to this discussion is that the eighth section of article one of the US Constitution declares that Congress has the authority “To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization …” (fourth paragraph).  See constitution.congress.gov/constitution.  Also relevant is the first paragraph of the ninth section of article one: “The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a Tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person.”  Of further interest is section five of article two: “No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President” in consideration with the moral equity and wisdom of Deuteronomy 17:15: … one from among thy brethren shalt thou set king over thee: thou mayest not set a stranger over thee …  Similarly important for a majority of we the people claiming an evangelical influence and interest is what follows in verses 18-20: And it shall be, when he sitteth upon the throne of his kingdom, that he shall write him a copy of this law in a book … And it shall be with him, and he shall read therein all the days of his life: that he may learn to fear the Lord his God, to keep all the words of this law and these statutes, to do them: That his heart be not lifted up above his brethren, and that he turn not aside from the commandment, to the right hand, or to the left: to the end that he may prolong his days in his kingdom, he, and his children ….  ↩︎
3. archives.gov/founding-docs/declaration-transcript.  This statement introducing the list of grievances concludes, “To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.” ↩︎
4. Matthew Sorens and Jenny Yang, Welcoming the Stranger: Justice, Compassion, & Truth in the Immigration Debate: Revised and Expanded (Downers Grove, Ill.: IVP Books, 2018), 130.  See worldrelief.org/welcoming-the-stranger.  They also disclaim, “That net benefit to the government, though, is the result of paying $105,000 more over a lifetime than the benefits received to the federal government, while receiving $25,000 in benefits more than what is paid to state and local governments.”  Still, the overall national net gain is profoundly positive. ↩︎
5. nps.gov/fost/blogs/the-declaration-of-independence-what-were-they-thinking.htm ↩︎
6. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grievances_of_the_United_States_Declaration_of_Independence ↩︎
7. Ibid. Regarding the Declaration’s seventh grievance: “After the peace of 1763, few people settled west of the Alleghenies due to these restrictions, and immigration had almost ceased by the time of the revolution.” ↩︎
8. Ilya Somin, “Immigration and the Principles of the Declaration of Independence: The principles of the Declaration of Independence and the American Revolution justify free migration rights,” at Reason.com/volokh/2021/07/04/immigration-the-american-revolution-and-the-principles-of-the-declaration-of-independence.  I am indebted to my Brazilian wife, Fernanda Da Rosa Van Leuven, who found this article doing research for me.  This year, we celebrated seven years of marriage.  After first getting her green card, when Fernanda later became a citizen several years into our marriage, she said she wept tears of admiration reading the U.S. founding documents (as presently amended).  She also joined me voting for her first time during last November’s U.S. election. ↩︎
9. Ibid. ↩︎
10. Soerens and Yang, 126.  They also state, “… the annual number of US births would have declined since 1970 if it weren’t for the increase in births to immigrant women.”  Not unrelated to lower birth rates is the U.S. abortion epidemic. ↩︎
11. usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2025/06/13/trump-immigration-migrant-farmers-hotel-workers-deported/84182394007/?tbref=hp ↩︎
12. Soerens and Yang, 128.  Quoting Roger Lowenstein, “The Immigration Equation,” in the New York Times Magazine (July 9, 2006), 36.  They also write, “In fact, according to a survey by the Wall Street Journal, forty-four out of forty-six economists surveyed thought that illegal immigration was beneficial to the economy.” ↩︎
13. Ibid, 134. ↩︎
14. See also Psalm 146:9: The Lord preserveth the strangers; he relieveth the fatherless and widow …: this is a Scripture the author and his first four children clung to when he became a widower and they were very young.  To view or listen to a sermon and presentations that reflect the Scriptures on immigration at his church (mostly by him), but also his World Relief SoCal colleague at a Wednesday night workshop, visit this playlist: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLTHByEgU0Ni0vhKxzJI6kfZy7dAk9d1f6. ↩︎
15. Sorens and Yang, 55. On this note, what also is important to be aware of with comments heard that immigrants today should just be expected to do so as did earlier generations, “the immigration policies in our country have changed drastically since the era of Ellis Island, when 98 percent of immigrants who arrived were admitted into the United States, usually after just a few hours of processing and without need of a visa. In those days, while the journey to the United States was often a harrowing voyage by ship and required great bravery and risk, it was easy to immigrate ‘the legal way.’ In fact, it would have been difficult to find an illegal way to immigrate.” Ibid, 68-69. ↩︎
16. “Caring for immigrants is a central theme in Scripture … God does not suggest that we welcome immigrants; he commands it—not once or twice, but over and over again … Christians seeking to influence a national immigration policy should push for laws that are welcoming to and specially concerned with immigrants, just as God decreed for the nation of Israel.  The present immigration situation in the United States, however, presents a special challenge, as Scripture’s many references to immigrants never mention or consider their legal status—a concept that may not have applied during the biblical era, just as it did not apply during the early history of the United States, when there were practically no limits on immigration and when all immigrants were, as far [as] the governing authority was concerned, legal.”  Soerens and Yang, 92, 94. ↩︎
17. Ibid, 99.  See more of the suggested solution spelled out in footnote 33. ↩︎
18. evangelicalimmigrationtable.com/iwasastranger. Here are a number that the author lists in his own adapted “Welcoming the Stranger” presentation: Genesis 12 (see Heb. 11:8, 13-16); Ex. 12:49; 22:21; 23:9, 12; Deut. 5:14-15; 10:17-19; 24:19-22; Ruth 1:16-19, 13-17; Ps. 146:9; Prov. 31:8-9; Jer. 22:3; Zech. 7:9-10; Jer. 22:3; Ezek. 22:29-30; Mal. 3:5; Mat. 25:35. ↩︎
19. Matthew Soerens, “Welcoming the Stranger” public presentation in Orange, CA, on February 5, 2025.  This article’s author recently heard R.C. Sproul on a “Renewing Your Mind” broadcast share with his listening audience that a survey of his earnest classroom attendees revealed only 50 percent had ever read the entire Bible—and he then qualified that this was very high compared to the broader evangelical community.  One might ask, which Scriptures are read and in what redemptive-historical context or systematic, confessional connection? ↩︎
20. Soerens and Yang, 209. They add, “Even still, 68 percent of evangelicals said they would value hearing a sermon that taught how biblical principles and examples can be applied to immigration.”  Perhaps this article will thus be a welcome voice for our new and valuable but vulnerable neighbors. ↩︎
21. See Trueman’s article, firstthings.com/why-i-became-an-american-citizen, in which he writes, “Gratitude is the essence of immigration.”  Trueman also is a contributing writer for the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals and a host of its Mortification of Spin podcast, professor of biblical and theological studies at Grove City College in Pennsylvania, besides being an ordained minister in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church in America. ↩︎
22. Carl R. Trueman, Republocrat: Confessions of a Liberal Conservative (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 2010), 56-57.  See chapter 3, “Not-So-Fantastic Mr. Fox.” ↩︎
23. Ibid, 58-59. ↩︎
24. Soerens and Yang, 129. ↩︎
25. Ibid, 136.  Soreness and Yang also discuss a recognizably higher entrepreneurial instinct among immigrants, which warrants appreciation of President Ronald Reagan’s words that follow below about welcoming immigrants as impactful on our nation’s strong heritage along with this summary observation: “Reagan also knew that to stimulate the economy, he had to go beyond economics and renew the entrepreneurial spirit that had been so damaged …”  Alfred S. Regnery, Upstream: The Ascendance of American Conservatism (Threshold Editions: New York, 2008), 312. See also this recent WSJ article that touches on the Declaration and immigration with American entrepreneurialism here: “How—and Why—U.S. Capitalism Is Unlike Any Other: The main difference between America’s brand of capitalism and elsewhere: a focus on the individual and an incentive to take risks.” Thanks to Brannon Ellis, Executive Editor at Modern Reformation, for bringing this to the author’s attention as relating to this article. ↩︎
26. Soerens and Yang, 88. ↩︎
27. Matthew Soerens, “Welcoming the Stranger” public speaking presentation, February 5, 2025, in Orange, CA. ↩︎
28. John Stapleford, in Welcoming the Stranger, Soerens and Yang,122. ↩︎
29. Somin, Ibid.  He source links to founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/99-01-02-11097. Let it be shared here that the author and his church are full subscriptionists to the original Westminster Standards and thus very much anti-disestablishmentarians. ↩︎
30. Ibid.  He source links to rotunda.upress.virginia.edu/founders/default.xqy?keys=FOEA-print-01-02-02-6127. ↩︎
31. Ibid.  He source links to https://famguardian.org/Subjects/Politics/ThomasJefferson/jeff1280.htm. ↩︎
32. Ibid. ↩︎
33. Ibid. ↩︎
34. Such as listing its original ten by the First Congress of the U.S. a year later in “The Bill of Rights” proposed in 1789 and ratified in 1791. See archives.gov/founding-docs/bill-of-rights-transcript, and especially the later 13^th —and the 14^th with its opening “Citizenship Clause.”  ↩︎
35. Somin, Ibid. ↩︎
36. Ibid.  He source links to washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/03/09/immigration-and-color-blindness/?tid=a_inl&utm_term=.e367b3fc3462&itid=lk_inline_manual_17. ↩︎
37. Ibid.  He source links to longislandwins.com/news/national/lincoln-the-know-nothings-and-immigrant-america. ↩︎
38. Ibid.  He source links to theregreview.org/2020/12/15/somin-immigration-restrictions-harm-citizens. ↩︎
39. Ibid. ↩︎
40. presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/statement-united-states-immigration-and-refugee-policy.  ↩︎
41. The author highly recommends pages 172-173 of Welcoming the Stranger by Soerens and Yang offering these summary solutions to modern immigration challenges in the U.S.: “1. Improved enforcement of policies consistent with humanitarian values.  2. Reforms to our visa systems.  3. Earned legalization of undocumented immigrants.”    As well, he highlights these two statements within this section on these pages: “We believe it is appropriate to take measures to make it harder to immigrate illegally, whether by unlawful entry or by overstaying a valid visa.  Furthermore, we can disincentivize unlawful migration by creating functional, enforceable systems to ensure that employers verify the work-authorization status of their employees, making it harder to work unlawfully.  In protecting the border, though, we also believe in treating all individuals with dignity and respect.  Unaccompanied children and those who are seeking asylum in particular should be given a fair screening to ensure they are not returned to a dangerous situation.” And, “If we are going to make it harder to immigrate illegally, we also must make it easier to immigrate legally—not without limit but to ensure that families can be reunited without excessive waits, that our economy can access the labor it needs to thrive, which includes both those considered highly skilled and those categorized as low skilled, and that our nation continues to be a place of refuge for some of the most vulnerable individuals fleeing persecution.  If visa systems are adjusted so the supply of visas roughly matches the demand for labor and family reunification (which is difficult to achieve in a dynamic economy with a quota of visas set by statute, rather than a flexible and annual determination), we provide viable options for both employers and employees to gain the benefits of migration and significantly reduce the motivation for migrants to cross borders illegally … We should not try to fix a system without addressing what to do with eleven million undocumented people living in the shadows of society.  This current situation mocks the idea of the rule of law and clearly requires reform, but we also recognize that most of the undocumented are hard-working, contributing members of our society.  Immigration reform thus must include an opportunity for immigrants who are already contributing to this country to get right with the law by regularizing their status after satisfying reasonable criteria, and over time to pursue an option to become Lawful Permanent Residents and eventually US citizens.  A path to legal status would provide undocumented immigrants with a chance to admit their infraction against the law, pay an appropriate fine as a consequence, and proceed to become fully restored, integrated members of our society if they wish to stay here.  This would not be amnesty, because immigrants would have to earn their right to stay in the United States.” ↩︎
42. Ilya Somin also considers that, “In recent years, many conservatives have come to favor a highly restrictionist approach to immigration policy. But that position is in conflict with their own professed commitment to principles such as free markets, liberty, colorblindness, and enforcing constitutional limits on the power of the federal government. These values ultimately all support a strong presumption in favor of free migration.”  See papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2968440.  ↩︎
43. Soerens and Yang, 124-125. ↩︎