Charles Garcia’s piece for CNN “Why Illegal Immigrant is a Slur” makes a strong argument that this is a loaded term and should be avoided. This is not a new argument and I do not intend to rehash the all the arguments on both sides. I will point out that what I see as one original point and that is Garcia’s invocation of language from the recently decided Supreme Court case, Arizona v. United States.
In the majority decision, Justice Anthony Kennedy writes, “As a general rule, it is not a crime for a removable alien to remain present in the United States.”
This quotation alone gives clear support to those like me who oppose the use of “illegal immigrant.” If it is not a crime for an individual stay in the country when his or her status is such that he or she could be deported, how is he or she “illegal”? As Justice Kennedy points out immigration violations are civil not criminal offenses. Therefore, there are much more accurate terms to use (like Kennedy’s “removable alien”) that do not presuppose criminality the way “illegal alien” does.
It is also worth noting that in this entire decision, except when quoting other sources, the justices do not use the term “illegal alien.” The Supreme Court is obviously fallible (see Plessy v. Ferguson for example), but I am happy to be able to use the weight of this august institution in making this linguistic point.

