The following editorial appeared Monday in the Yakima Herald-Republic:

Chalk up Thursday’s demonstration at the 40th Avenue branch of Bank of America as a classic clash between freedom of speech and a free market system. Then be thankful we all live in a country built upon a Constitution that guarantees both.

More than two dozen people picketed the bank, protesting a pilot program that offers credit cards in Los Angeles to people who do not have Social Security numbers. The boycott was largely at the instigation of the Yakima chapter of the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps, a civilian group that patrols U.S. borders and reports on illegal activities.

The new bank program is seen by some as being aimed at – and rewarding – people in the country illegally. The bank denies that’s the case. The cards have a credit limit of $500, and in order to qualify, applicants must have held a Bank of America account for at least three months without an overdraft. The card then allows a person to build a credit history.

Be that as it may, do the Minutemen have the right to such a protest? Of course they do. And we’ll support that right just as we earlier supported the group’s right to meet peacefully on a regular basis at a public facility in Selah. It’s called freedom of association and expression, and as long as it’s done within the parameters of the law, they are entitled.

Does Bank of America have a right to make such a business decision? Of course it does.

If the program is soured by defaults – and bear in mind we’re only talking about a pilot program – then the bank will have to absorb it. If there is any passing on of such losses to customers or shareholders, those people have the right to quit the bank or sell their stock and buy elsewhere.

Some of those supporting the Minuteman effort in Yakima last week closed their BOA accounts in protest. While that seems a bit misdirected before any similar program even arrives in Central Washington – if it does – that, too, is their right.

If anything is puzzling about the bank’s pilot program, it is offering the card to someone who has no Social Security number – thus inevitably linking it to illegal immigration and guaranteeing instant controversy.

Actually, any employer, at some point during the hiring process, is going to have to have a Social Security number from a new hire for tax purposes, so anyone in this country illegally and seeking work will have to come up with something. And, granted, fake identification has become something of a cottage industry nationwide.

But, not to be facetious, if a Social Security number is required for employment, how can someone who doesn’t have one earn any money to pay on a credit card? We’ll leave it to bank officials to sort that one out.

Frankly, the whole episode seems a tempest in a teapot. If the bank wants to risk a pilot program, so be it. If the Minutemen, their supporters and others want to close accounts in protest, so be it.

Now let’s fry bigger fish and move on to demanding serious and meaningful dialogue and action on immigration reform legislation in Congress. That’s where the issue must be addressed, not with $500-limit credit cards.