Should 'citizen juries' decide illegal immigrant status?
Newt Gingrich wants to put ordinary citizens on juries to decide the fate of illegal immigrants. Is he on to something?
When former House Speaker Newt Gingrich proposed creating a legal mechanism to allow millions of long-term, established illegal immigrants to gain permanent residency, his GOP presidential rivals pounced, attacking him for supporting "amnesty." Gingrich denied that, explaining in Florida over the weekend that under his plan, the onerous "path to legality" would run through local "citizen juries" that would ultimately decide the legal status of eligible immigrants with deep community ties. "It requires trusting citizens rather than bureaucrats," he said. Is his idea smart?
Even hard-liners should (quietly) back Newt's plan: "I've been a real hard-ass on illegal immigration," says Jay Tea in Wizbang, but I'm alright with Gingrich's immigration ideas, even with their "degree of amnesty." The "dark truth" is that some "illegals" are here to stay, and as long as we put some limits on these local juries' ability to grant residency, Newt's compromise seems "workable." The citizen panels even have the "slightly subversive" benefit of taking immigration law out of federal hands.
"Gingrich exposes dark truth on illegal immigration"
The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
There's less here than meets the eye: Local juries would still require a costly "massive new bureaucracy," says Suzy Khimm in The Washington Post, a likely deal-breaker for the Right. Meanwhile, the Left will object that Gingrich's plan heavily favors "well-off immigrants," since applicants must prove they're receiving no federal assistance. It's nice that Gingrich is trying to "bridge the gap in the immigration debate," but the citizen juries can't support the weight of his half-baked solutions.
"Gingrich: Citizen juries should decide which illegal immigrants stay or go"
Give Gingrich credit for original thinking: It's not like "Obama has taken courageous stands to create a clearcut path to citizenship for illegal immigrants," says the Santa Cruz, Calif., Sentinel in an editorial. Gingrich's plan isn't perfect, but he deserves kudos for sticking his neck out with an "actually fairly detailed" and realistic proposal. Besides, giving immigrants a shot at chasing the American dream, instead of automatically ripping them apart from their families, is more than good policy — it's good politics.
"As we see it: Newt voice on immigration reform"
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
-
Political cartoons for November 8Cartoons Saturday’s political cartoons include narco boats, and the new Lincoln monument
-
Why Trump pardoned crypto criminal Changpeng ZhaoIn the Spotlight Binance founder’s tactical pardon shows recklessness is rewarded by the Trump White House
-
Crossword: November 8, 2025The Week's daily crossword puzzle
-
Has Zohran Mamdani shown the Democrats how to win again?Today’s Big Question New York City mayoral election touted as victory for left-wing populists but moderate centrist wins elsewhere present more complex path for Democratic Party
-
Millions turn out for anti-Trump ‘No Kings’ ralliesSpeed Read An estimated 7 million people participated, 2 million more than at the first ‘No Kings’ protest in June
-
Ghislaine Maxwell: angling for a Trump pardonTalking Point Convicted sex trafficker's testimony could shed new light on president's links to Jeffrey Epstein
-
The last words and final moments of 40 presidentsThe Explainer Some are eloquent quotes worthy of the holders of the highest office in the nation, and others... aren't
-
The JFK files: the truth at last?In The Spotlight More than 64,000 previously classified documents relating the 1963 assassination of John F. Kennedy have been released by the Trump administration
-
'Seriously, not literally': how should the world take Donald Trump?Today's big question White House rhetoric and reality look likely to become increasingly blurred
-
Will Trump's 'madman' strategy pay off?Today's Big Question Incoming US president likes to seem unpredictable but, this time round, world leaders could be wise to his playbook
-
Democrats vs. Republicans: who are US billionaires backing?The Explainer Younger tech titans join 'boys' club throwing money and support' behind President Trump, while older plutocrats quietly rebuke new administration