Talk:Killing of Kate Steinle

Illegal vs. undocumented

The word "undocumented" is intended to make illegal immigrants sound more benign. It is also a dishonest word because illegal immigrants have plenty of documents -- fake and stolen ones. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.44.233.118 (talk) 16:23, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Can someone tell me the difference? Because I'm not seeing any, and I'm not seeing a reason why it should be "illegal immigrant" and not "undocumented immigrant" as the latter works better?

"works better'. Works better how? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.220.40.51 (talk) 15:23, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

The phrases "illegal immigrant" and "undocumented immigrant" are both phrases invented by partisans for political purposes. The term "alien" is codified in federal immigration law. The term has well understood meaning and is used throughout federal and state statutes. See https://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/SLB/HTML/SLB/act.html for more details. If you simply reference the definitions section of the act you will see that the term alien is the key term in the immigration law, see https://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/SLB/HTML/SLB/0-0-0-1/0-0-0-29/0-0-0-101.html#0-0-0-164. Someone who is not a citizen of the U.S. is an alien. An alien who is in the U.S. and who has not satisfied the requirements under the law to be here legally is an "illegal alien" or an alien who is in the U.S. illegally. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RumorQuake (talk • contribs) 02:23, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Agree term "undocumented immigrant" is inherently ambiguous/confusing/misleading, the correct term is "illegal alien", however the WP-accepted term is "illegal immigrant" (proof: WP articles Illegal immigration to the United States and Illegal immigrant population of the United States). Also, the purpose of the chosen term is to match meaning "a person in the United States illegally" -- "illegal immigrant" does that, "undocumented immigrant" doesn't (what does it mean?! -- a person in the United States "undocumentedly"!? -- that is an example how the term is inherently ambiguous/confusing/misleading). When MSM uses "undocumented immigrant", are we transcription monkeys and must follow suit? When the only purpose possible in the context is to represent meaning "person in the United States illegally"? A user recently reverted w/ editsum asserting that "undocumented immigrant" is a "better term" [1]. What possible justification for that assertion other than WP editors must parrot a source using that term? Nonsense, and a bad idea as well as already explained. --IHTS (talk) 20:28, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

here's my thoughts: undocumented is the term for anyone here who doesnt have current documentation to show their citizenship or immigration status. once they are actually found to be here without documentation, they can be considered in violation of immigration law, and labelled "illegal". so, until someone has been found to be out of documentation status on their current immigration case, its better to refer to them as undocumented. the idea that there are millions of illegal immigrants is quite accurate. but for an individual being considered, we should not call them "illegal" as they have not had their day in court yet. in regards to "alien" vs "immigrant", while i dont like using immigrant, cause the word has a connotation of being already vetted to come in, i dislike "alien" even more, as it has a severe xenophobic tone. it is in some circles an open question as to whether our constitution is a "Citizenist" document, and it doesnt really grant rights to citizens per se, only grants US the power to elect people to protect OUR rights. thus, i think "undocumented immigrant" or "undocumented migrant" (my preferred, as it captures the transient, migratory status of someone who IS here, but doesnt yet have the right to STAY here without some legal repercussions) has a more NPOV feel to it. i know the us govt may use illegal alien, but that doesnt mean we have to, as the legal term may in fact be too pov for the average reader. the distinctions can be made in the main article on the topic.(mercurywoodrose)2602:304:CFD0:6350:2030:C4D3:CDED:DF45 (talk) 06:13, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Your "thoughts" don't mean squat in an encyclopedia or in any piece of academic writing or reporting that claims credibility. They are "aliens" in the U.S. federal code, by law. They are also "illegal" under the law, in that they violated a national border and U.S. Code. Every country in the world refers to them as illegal aliens. For Wikipedia not to do so, would only make Wikipedia appear politicized, corrupted (in its editing), and unreliable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Starhistory22 (talk • contribs) 08:08, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

The argument goes something like "They aren't illegal until a Judge says they are." and so to generalize all of them as illegal denies them the respect and right of due process, and of being innocent until proven guilty. Also the newspeak words like "undocumented" act as a barrier to curb the human tendency to dehumanize a group of outsiders. Even if they are in the country illegally, they ar still human, and have rights, to include the right to due process. It's not for average person to determine their legal status; courts, judges and lawyers do that. I hate the truth of this, but it is the truth and so I have come to accept it. Hope it helps someone else.---- 72.181.112.54 (talk) 19:25, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Her Name

...was Kathryn Michelle Steinle, and publishing anything less than her full and legal name conveys intentional disrespect to her existence, and the right she had to it.72.181.112.54 (talk) 18:01, 1 July 2023 (UTC)