The immediacy of the problem of too many illegals, taking jobs which might have been filled by current citizens or legal residents (including those from their own countries) is great enough that it tends to overwhelm more general, abstract discussions of what values might apply in a variety of situations. This part of why I hate - hate - "comprehensive" government solutions. Under the guise of looking at the big picture and solving many problems at once, "comprehensive" reform is merely a strategy for "everyone gets to give unfair and expensive advantages to their supporters, in exchange for putting up with other people getting some too." Comprehensive education, tax, finance, justice...beware those reforms, even in the hands of people you agree with and trust. When you hear the word "comprehensive," zip in the phrase "cocaine-based" instead.
This why I support minor solutions that turn down the heat on problems instead. Build a fence. Make it more risky for employers to hire illegals. Wait. Observe. The problems are not solved, but they are now closer to an absorbable level. We can then afford to take a breath and have some nuance, as Democrats used to say until the evasion became clear.
There are interesting issues here, that do not follow the absolutist rhetoric of our current political discussion. I'm going to have a go at some of those, but in the meantime, remember that my simpler point is that in crisis, absolutist arguments are not unreasonable. Something that claims to solve 100% of the problem but only solves 50%, and incurs other hidden costs or sins, might still be a good temporary solution.
I brought two immigrants to America, teenaged sons from Romania. Did they take jobs from citizens? Are they a net cost to the country? Perhaps. That will be part of my discussion. The difference between European assimilation and American assimilation will also figure in.