Agree very much with your earlier point about the invalidity of "wage suppression." We can probably both agree that the "our feral, er, federal, government" has no legitimate claim to hold any sway on interfering with labor contracts between two willing competent adult parties.
The solution to the J & J brothers may well be allowing both in. Given the artificially tight quota constriction in recent decades and the ease with which one makes physical "illegal" entry or letting legal entry lapse into "illegality" in recent decades, one has to question the intelligence of the brother who places himself in a counter-productive long waiting line when there were much quicker ways. It would be like people turning themselves in for speeding on the highway (or even always sticking to speed limit, not 1mph over, for that matter) or turning themselves in for having kinky sex upon finding irrational laws in the books banning "sodomy" which are hardly ever enforced. Sometimes one has to wonder if such fastidiousness to sticking to unnatural laws just because they are in the books is a desirable trait at all for new citizenship . . . sounds to me like someone who worships the state above the individual, and would someday cite "just following orders" as defense (the "Nuremberg Defense").
BTW, I'm not at all advocating law breaking in general. There are however categories of laws that are essentially proscriptions against entirely victimless "crimes," which are no crime at all; there are laws that create entire categories of victims for nothing more than temporary political expedience (appeasing some voter groups that would like to put the jackboots of the government on someone else' face). The validity of such laws are questionable at best; strict enforcement of them would bring nothing but chaos.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
