Immigration has always (at least in the prior 50 decades, depending upon which part of the country you're in or how close to a national border you are). Remember when young pregnant women were streaming to CA so their kids could be born "American"? Major financial issues for the CA healthcare system. 30 years ago, at least, that was happening. NAFTA was supposed to have expanded manufacturing job opportunities in Mexico, so there would be no real need for Mexicans to cross the border for a good-paying job . . . but the USA industries who expanded down there didn't really raise the wages in those new factories very much at all, while reaping the financial advantages of their new facilities. For better pay, still cross the border.
As the USA tried to limit legal immigration, sometimes up to 8 years for the applicants, nothing was really done about the border back then. Probably it was, but more people on the ground didn't account for what was going on 50 feet below ground (tunnels into houses/warehouses on the USA side of the border.
As long as the USA is seen at "the best place to be" (although WE might not perceive it as such!), the desires of non-USA citizens will remain and motivate them to come, illegally or otherwise. People are risking life and limb, literally, to get here from Central America, not just Mexico, which is unfortunate, but proves that they want a better life for themselves and their families, even if they die trying. The USA is the victim of its own successes, it seems.
In the middle '60s, when college guys got summer jobs on construction crews to fund their college studies, a decade later, it was "Others" in those jobs, by observation. It used to be just a southern border issue, but now it's the same for our Canadian friends (THEIR southern border).
Some states have sought to get ahead of the issue by welcoming immigrants, seeking to get them Green Cards, allowing them to have drivers' licenses, and further promote them as sales tax-paying citizens that positively contribute to the local economies, PLUS getting them into a database of sorts. These entities also desire these people to be law-abiding citizens who are NOT afraid of the police for any reason (which is HUGE issue to the law enforcement people as immigrant crime against other illegals is very high itself).
And then there have been some born-in-the-USA Mexicans who have allowed themselves to be picked up by ICE, transported back to Mexico, visit relatives once there, and then return to the USA as a normal citizen would. ICE checks closer on such things, now, as I understand it.
The best "bring jobs back to America" tactic would be for Mexico to put prior-USA emissions controls in place on their factories. Those retro-fits would mean jobs in Mexico. Plus increased costs for the American businesses with factories down there. Then put a national minimum wage law in effect down there (no duties or taxes), such that the only reason to make things in Mexico would be to produce goods near the place of their main sale. Give citizens a better standard of living that drugs and opiods doesn't fuel, so that might decrease that traffic and other related issues, down there.
NONE of these things will happen overnight. The first wave of immigration in the earlier 20th Century came from Europe. The later 20th Century immigration comes from Mexico and Central America. Same reasons, different locations. As we like to solicit educated immigrants from China, but there are issues there too!
The Europeans aren't the main thrust of immigration as their local economies recovered after WWII, so no need to go anywhere else. The Central American economies have not increased to that point . . . and probably never will if things continue as they have been, locally.
Isolationism has its positives and negatives, just as globalized manufacturing does.
As for "lawsuits"? The principle of sovereign immunity can kick in. You can't sue a governmental entity (local, state, national) unless they'll let you do that. They can react with some sort of "proposed settlement", but not allow the full lawsuit to happen unless they let it. A lawsuit can be filed, get much publicity, but a settlement happens rather than the full-blown court trial, usually.
Double jeopardy is only operational in criminal issues. Which is why criminal and civil lawsuits an happen for the same alleged crime and same people involved. I don't agree with that, but that's the way it is. One trial, one verdict, end of situation, the way I see it.
The whole immigration issue has more dynamics and twists/turns to it that any ONE person can comprehend! IT's not going to be fixed with "a wall" above ground. When and IF that happens, the coyotes will just literally go underground, using prior drug-built tunnels and charge more for a "safer" product. A Tweeter-in-Chief is not going to fix it, even if his magic wands have Energizer batteries.
CBODY67
