Because of the recent social media focus on immigration (made possible by the Trump policy of separating children from their detained parents) many people are reiterating their positions supporting various policies that would restrict immigration. Not many people, though, are bothering to articulate the opposite position, but many libertarians support the idea of open borders. That's because they view a "border" as nothing more than an act of interventionism and force on the part of the state. It prevents one of the basic human freedoms: the freedom of movement.
Laws passed by the government to control immigration often reflect corporatism more than anything else. Interest groups like trade unions, trade associations, and protected industries lobby for immigration restricts in order to keep a country's labor supply low and wages high. But ultimately, interventionist laws like this prevent voluntary agreements between the parties (natives and foreigners). Any company that profits from the government's "protection" of its border is likely to support what we might otherwise consider draconian immigration laws. As always, follow the money.
Case in point: Unisys has worked for the US Customs and Border Protection agency for years, supplying data analytics and biometrics for the government's targeting and analysis systems. In May of this year Unisys was again awarded a CBP contract to help the agency assess threats from travelers crossing the border.
As ABCNews reporter Ted Hesson noted back in 2013, "Interestingly, some of the companies being paid to maintain the border have also donated to politicians involved in the immigration reform process." This year, Unisys has already donated $51,500 to various members of Congress.
Note that Unisys CEO Peter Altabef consults on the National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee (appointed by President Obama), which is an agency of the Homeland Security Department.
