One problem I have with the way the immigration debate gets discussed stems from illegal immigrants almost always being presented as victims. Fleeing a poorly-run country, etc.
There are many, many failings re: the stock consideration of illegal immigrants, but one avenue I'd be tempted to explore is this: Does a duty, however slight or qualified, to one's own neighborhood exist, particularly in a democratic/western nation? To use the obvious example: If Mexico is for the most part - let's be blunt - kind of a shithole, is there any duty on the part of mexican natives to address this problem themselves?
What's interesting there is if the answer is yes, one has a duty to one's nation (or neighborhood, etc) that cannot be so easily abdicated, then to what degree can illegal immigrants be held responsible for turning their back on their country? (Of course, if they aren't turning their back on their country, then their presence is even more problematic due to dual loyalty concerns.) If the answer is no, that there is no duty to one's nation.. then how can one suggest that people in completely different nations have concerns about the country in question?
A related side question: How much harm has America caused Mexico specifically by being the wealthier, (for now) more stable and prosperous nation that can be illegally immigrated to with relative ease?