NYT: "If They're Essential, They Can't Be Illegal"

That makes no sense whatsoever, of course. 

There's no contradiction between working at an essential job and being in the country illegally.

And, contrary to a central claim of the piece, few Americans are angry at the illegals. More commonly, they're ticked off at leftist extremists who mindlessly push for open or quasi-open borders. Since that would be disastrous. Why be angry at poor illegals who come here to work hard, perhaps with hopes of becoming citizens? (Though anger can spill over, of course.) I'd sure as hell do the same if I were in their position. But the fact is that we can't let in everybody who wants in. Another fact is: lots of other poor, hard-working, hopeful people are waiting to get in the legal way. Another fact is: allowing illegals to flood in virtually unchecked has very bad consequences, even if most of them are good, hard-working, etc.

And: if not for illegals, farm wages (and a lot of other wages) would have to rise until Americans would take the jobs. 

Finally: you can't make policy on the basis of sympathy alone. If we did that, we would be swamped with immigrants, and it would be the end of America. Unbridled sympathy means the lifeboat is swamped and everybody drowns. You can't make policy simply by saying Look, don't you feel sorry for these people? You have to understand the costs of policies as well. If we threw open the borders, as the vanguard of progressivism wants us to do, everybody in America would deserve your sympathy in short order. Everyone loses if we fail to preserve the very things people are willing to sneak in illegally for.You have to draw some lines somewhere.