Immigration


The owner of a famous Philadelphia restaurant has come under fire for posting a sign that reads: “This is America—when ordering, speak English.” Roberto Santiago, the executive director of the city’s Council of Spanish Speaking Organizations, says that the sign is “racist” and that it means Geno’s Steaks does not want to serve Latino customers. Now the Philadelphia Commission on Human Relations has filed a complaint against Geno’s, charging that the sign constitutes discrimination on the basis of nationality or ethnicity. Owner Joey Vento, a grandson of Italian immigrants, is refusing to take down the sign, citing his free speech rights and that fact that no customers are turned away at the restaurant.

I would say that I am surprised that this is controversial except that almost nothing surprises anymore. Telling people they should order in English is racist? Such an idea assumes that language in inherent in race, which is absurd. Language is a learned behavior that a person masters with discipline and time; it has nothing to do with race or ethnicity. The simple fact is that English is the primary language in this country and has been since its inception over 200 years ago. Suppose Mr. Vento actually did require his patrons to order in English or else not serve them—would that really be wrong?

Discrimination in itself is not inherently wrong. Restaurants discriminate all the time based on the attire of customers, the number of people in a party, and how much the customers can afford to pay for meals. What is improper is unjustified discrimination: discrimination based on characteristics over which people have no control, such as race, ethnicity, nationality, and gender. But people do have a choice concerning what languages they learn. Since Geno’s is a private establishment, it is entitled not to serve customers based on values it deems to be important so long as doing so does not violate basic constitutional tenets. In this case, Mr. Vento is simply expressing his opinion that speaking English is important in America, which may discriminate against those who cannot speak English, but it is a perfectly legitimate and constitutional—not to mention rational—view to take.

An Ohio sheriff has come up with a creative way of drawing national attention to the large number of illegal immigrants present in the country: he sends a monthly bill to the federal Department of Homeland Security for the cost of jailing those arrested on criminal charges in his county.  Butler County Sheriff Richard Jones says he is fed up with the federal government’s seeming refusal to shore up the borders to stem the tide of illegal immigration and that he will continue to send the bills until noticeable progress is made on the issue.  Jones acknowledged that he does not expect to receive payments from the federal government, but to date, the bills have totaled $125,000 for housing 900 foreign-born inmates in the Butler County jail over the past year. 

Jones should be commended for his methodology.  There is a time-honored tradition dating back to the colonial era of states letting the national government know they are unhappy with its performance in a particular area through all sorts of protest actions.  This stunt is harmless because the sheriff cannot force the feds to pay up, but because of his creativity, a serious problem gains more national exposure.