User:Bneu2013/sandbox#Honorary designations

Update - here's my full rationale. First off, as others have pointed out, this might be a malformed RfC. But since the requester is asking which terms we think should be used, I'm going to go ahead and share my stance. As multiple people have already pointed out, both terms are far from perfect. But I'm going to start out with why I think "undocumented" is problematic. The main problem I have with this term is similar to the problems I have with the terms "pro-choice" and "pro-life": it is terribly euphemistic, misleading, and usually inaccurate. Some of the people who advocate for the use of this term do so for the sheer reason that they find it offensive. But if they were to pull this argument on Wikipedia, not only would it fail WP:EUPHEMISM in an honest discussion, but it would be laughed off as someone trying to force their own personal opinions on everyone else. If I break a law and don't like being called a "lawbreaker", then why should I have the right to force everyone to use my preferred terminology? Which brings me to my next point: since we are discussing something that is in fact a violation of a law, I think it is important that we use terminology that reflects this, whether we agree with those laws or not. Now there are some people who prefer euphemistic terminology to describe people whose presence in the United States is in violation of federal law because they want to obscure this very fact or they don't agree with the laws. To be fair, I don't think that's most people, even the vast majority of people who prefer the term undocumented. But I feel that using this terminology lends undue weight to a certain point of view that seeks to obscure the illegality of some people's presence in the United States, even if that's not the intention. And there are some vulgar slurs for people illegally present that we shouldn't use; I don't need to say what they are. Many of the sources that prefer "undocumented" do indeed acknowledge that their decision to do so isn't without controversy.

As others have pointed out "undocumented" is rarely an accurate description of persons present in the United States; just because someone is here illegally doesn't mean there's no record of it. A huge share of the people who are in the United States illegally entered through lawful means, but remained after their authorization expired. This means that they had to apply and be accepted by DHS, which was most certainly documented in their records, and were granted some kind of identification. Furthermore, if they worked (which practically all of them do), then they paid Social Security, Medicare, federal, and state income taxes, if they lived in a state that has the latter. This means the IRS and their respective state agencies have plenty of records of their earnings and what programs they are eligible for. This doesn't just apply to visa overstays either; many people who cross into the United States illegally surrender to the Border Patrol, and are then released with paperwork and in some cases temporary work authorization, and ordered to appear in court. This means DHS has plenty of records of their presence in the country, even if they don't know where they are at all times.

Now as some have pointed out describing some people unlawfully present in the United States as "illegal immigrants" is inaccurate if you take this to mean that people who overstayed their visas entered the country illegally. This is why I think it is important to elaborate and distinguish between different situations that can result in one's presence within the United States being in violation of federal law (and most people don't do this). Although I'm not proposing any major policy changes here, I think it's best that when we elaborate when describing people who are in the United States illegally. For example, in a [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=William_Lamberth&diff=prev&oldid=1283549450 recent edit] I made to an article, I refer to a piece of legislation that would "authorize school districts to refuse to enroll students who are illegally present or unable to prove legal residence in the United States". This specifies that this refers to everyone who is illegally in the United States, regardless of how their status came to be. Whereas when describing someone whose visa expired, we should avoid language that implies that they entered the country illegally. This brings me to my next point: while I don't buy the argument that "illegal immigrants" implies that someone's existence per se is illegal, there are plenty of terms we can use that are not euphemistic and acknowledge the illegality of people who are in the United States in violation of federal law. Does anyone have a problem with something like "immigrants illegally in the United States cannot vote" as a substitute for "illegal immigrants cannot vote"? I want to reiterate that I'm not suggesting that we change every such instance on Wikipedia to this particular terminology or make some drastic guidelines change here, but I am asking if others would object to such a compromise. Many sources commonly used this kind of language.

Finally, I must admit from my personal experience that I don't see that the phrase "undocumented immigrant" has caught on with the general public as much as by, say, the media, politicians, advocacy groups, etc. While I confess that I do come from a conservative part of the country, I honestly can't tell you the last time I heard someone say "undocumented" in a casual conversation. I do know that I have heard people from all over the political spectrum say "illegal immigrants". I certainly don't have the best memory of everyone who will contribute to this discussion, but I think this may be a case of where a particular terminology hasn't caught on with the general public.

I would also like to emphasize that at this time, I am not advocating for the deprecation or restriction of any term used to describe persons illegally present in the United States, whether it be "illegal immigrants" or "undocumented immigrant". I think this needs more discussion and input before a consensus can be reached on this complex issue, although I realize coming to such a consensus will not be easy. I short, though, I think we should lean towards commonly used terminology that acknowledges the illegal presence of persons who are in the United States without authorization. I don't think "undocumented" does this. I also don't think we need to make up so new term as a compromise either.

The Lyle H. Fulton Memorial Bridge in Nashville is named for a political candidate from Nashville who received the Democratic nomination for the Tennessee Senate in 1954, but died of cancer before the general election. Fulton's brother Richard, who later became Mayor of Nashville, was subsequently seated in his place. The bridge was dedicated in honor of Fulton on July 9, 1971.{{cite news |last1=Jost |first1=Kenneth |title=Bridge Symbolizes Fulton Philosophy |url=https://www.newspapers.com/clip/56531618/bridge-symbolizes-fulton-philosophy/ |page=3 |accessdate=July 15, 2020 |work=The Nashville Tennessean |date=July 10, 1971|via=Newspapers.com}} In addition, a number of short sections, interchanges, and bridges along the route are named in honor of state troopers and other law enforcement personnel killed in the line of duty, as well as local politicians and other prominent citizens.{{cite news |last1=Meyer |first1=Holly |title=Nashville interchange named for fallen Metro officer |url=https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/local/davidson%20/2015/10/08/nashville-interchange-named-fallen-metro-officer/73576272/ |access-date=December 18, 2023 |work=The Tennessean |date=October 8, 2015 |location=Nashville}}{{cite news |last1=Nixon |first1=Katie |title=Memorial Day Hometown Jam Concert honors fallen Hendersonville officer |url=https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/local/sumner/2023/06/02/portion-of-i-65-renamed-in-lasting-tribute-to-fallen-officer/70253203007/ |access-date=December 18, 2023 |work=The Tennessean |date=June 2, 2023 |location=Nashville}}

In November 1998, the state commemorated the 40th anniversary of the completion of the first stretch of I-65 in Tennessee.{{cite news |last1=Edwards |first1=Joe |title=State celebrates 40th anniversary of I-65 |url=https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-leaf-chronicle-state-celebrates-40th/137001837/ |access-date=December 18, 2023 |work=The Leaf-Chronicle |agency=Associated Press |date=November 28, 1998 |location=Clarksville, Tennessee |page=B3}} On June 29, 2006, a historical marker celebrating the opening of this section as the first section of Interstate Highway was dedicated at the northbound Tennessee Welcome Center near Ardmore as part of the celebration of the 50th anniversary of the establishment of the Interstate Highway System.{{cite news |last1=Callow |first1=John |title=Tennessee celebrates 50th anniversary of interstates |url=https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-daily-news-journal-tennessee-celebra/137002093/ |access-date=December 18, 2023 |work=The Daily News-Journal |date=June 29, 2006 |location=Murfreesboro, Tennessee |page=B4}}{{cite press release |author = Tennessee Department of Transportation |title = Tennessee’s Celebrates 50 Years of Interstates Today! |url = http://www.tdot.state.tn.us/news/2006/062906.htm |publisher = Tennessee Department of Transportation |date = May 31, 2006 |access-date = December 18, 2023 |url-status = dead |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20061025175259/http://www.tdot.state.tn.us/news/2006/062906.htm |archive-date = October 25, 2006 }} As part of the celebration, TDOT also produced a postcard with an aerial photograph of this section taken around the time of its completion.{{cite press release |author = Tennessee Department of Transportation |title = America’s Interstates Turn 50: Tennessee’s Celebration Gets Underway |url = http://www.tdot.state.tn.us/news/2006/053106.htm |publisher = Tennessee Department of Transportation |date = May 31, 2006 |access-date = December 18, 2023 |url-status = dead |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20060629161446/http://www.tdot.state.tn.us/news/2006/053106.htm |archive-date = June 29, 2006 }}

{{cite book |type = Report |author1 = |year = 1962 |title = Report of the State Highway Commissioner of Tennessee for the Biennium Ending June 30, 1962 |url = https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=uc1.b3031574&seq=7 |location = Nashville |publisher = Tennessee Department of Highways |access-date = November 12, 2023 |page = |oclc = |via=HathiTrust Digital Library }}

{{cite book |type = Report |author1 = |year = 1964 |title = Report of the State Highway Commissioner of Tennessee for the Biennium Ending June 30, 1964 |url = https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=uc1.b3031574&seq=225 |location = Nashville |publisher = Tennessee Department of Highways |access-date = November 12, 2023 |page = |oclc = |via=HathiTrust Digital Library }}

{{cite book |type = Report |author1 = |year = 1966 |title = Report of the State Highway Commissioner of Tennessee for the Biennium Ending June 30, 1966 |url = https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=uc1.b3031574&seq=11 |location = Nashville |publisher = Tennessee Department of Highways |access-date = November 12, 2023 |pages = |oclc = |via=HathiTrust Digital Library }}