The Success of Migrant Protection Protocols Can’t Be Questioned
Check out what Matt wrote in the Daily Caller:
Since the chaos along our southern border peaked last May, there has been a precipitous decline in the flow of Central American economic migrants posing as asylum seekers entering the country illegally. Construction of additional border fencing and stepped up enforcement by Mexico at its own southern border have certainly played a significant role in alleviating the crisis, but it is another program implemented by the Trump administration that has had the greatest impact.
The Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP), first rolled out in January 2019, require migrants who want to seek asylum in the United States to wait in Mexico pending their immigration court hearing in the U.S.
We Need Border Controls To Fight The Coronavirus
On March 10, the United States confirmed that there are now over 1,000 confirmed cases of COVID-19, commonly known as the coronavirus.
On March 10, the United States confirmed that there are now over 1,000 confirmed cases of COVID-19, commonly known as the coronavirus. Multiple members of Congress announced they were remaining home to self-quarantine. Separately, the administration may force hundreds of thousands of federal employees to work from home. President Trump declared the virus a national emergency and cities across the country closed public places and banned large gatherings of people to stem the spread of the virus.
This is all to say that the United States is starting to take the coronavirus very seriously. This is not a partisan issue – Democrats and Republicans both claim to understand the severity of this global outbreak now present in 120 countries.
‘Release The ICE Detainees’ Myth Based On Flawed Understanding Of Jail Medicine
Since the beginning of the pandemic, open borders advocates have insisted that the United States must release every immigration violator currently in ICE custody. In fact, Documented’s piece is only the latest in a long line of articles and essays implying that the COVID-19 outbreak creates some kind of ethico-legal obligation for the United States to ignore its immigration laws and give any immigration violator who may have a passing risk of exposure to the virus a free run of the United States.
Their basic contention is that it’s unreasonable, some say cruel, to keep foreign nationals in immigration detention – because the close confines and communal living arrangements inherent in a detention setting allegedly increase the risk of becoming infected with COVID-19. And, because detainees can’t leave, they can’t protect themselves through social distancing, self-quarantine, etc. Therefore, the argument goes, continued immigration detention is akin to a death sentence.
New York’s Amended ‘Green Light’ Law Is Absurd, And It’s Also Illegal
Check out what Ira wrote in the Daily Caller.
If you violate federal immigration laws and settle in New York, the state will give you a driver’s license (and lots of other benefits too).
If you work at the New York Department of Motor Vehicles and you comply with a request for information from either Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) or U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), you could be charged with a Class E felony, be locked up for as long as five years, and forfeit many basic rights, including the right to vote.
Reflections of an Immigrant: Why Accepting DACA is Wrong
Check out what Pawel wrote in The Hill:
The Supreme Court recently ruled in favor of President Obama’s executive quasi-amnesty — Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). In essence, Chief Justice Roberts joined the liberal justices, determining that the Trump administration’s decision to rescind DACA supposedly did not offer sufficient explanation. As Justice Thomas pointed out, this effectively binds President Trump to an unlawful Obama policy. However, the court simultaneously ruled that the president can still rescind DACA again, but with a more comprehensive explanation. And the president stated that he intends to do just that.
But regardless of what ultimately happens on the DACA front, it is clear that the program is a bad policy that rewards illegal migration, flouts the rule of law, and is unjust towards American citizens.
Countries That Live By Remittances, Die By Remittances
Check out what Ira wrote in the Daily Caller:
In 2019, people working outside their homelands sent $554 billion of their earnings back to their native countries. Nearly all of this cash flowed from developed nations to less developed ones. The $554 billion in remittances eclipsed the total of all foreign investment in these receiving nations, and three times the amount these nations received in foreign aid.
Then came the COVID-19 pandemic. The global health crisis touched off a global economic crisis, resulting in millions of lost jobs and restrictions on travel that make it difficult for foreign workers to get to a job in another country, even if one is available.
The NO BAN Act Is Politics At Its Worst
Check out what Preston wrote for the Daily Caller.
House Democrats recently voted to strip the president of one of the most important tools at his disposal to protect America from foreign threats: the ability to suspend travel to the United States. The Democrats voted 233-183 to pass the NO BAN Act. Had this bill been law in early 2020, President Trump would have been unable to ban travel from China and Europe, which saved American lives according to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC).
Under current law, the president can react in real time to national security threats by restricting the entry of aliens under the authority laid out in Section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act.
No, Mass Immigration Won’t Save Social Security
Check out what Spencer wrote in the Daily Caller:
It’s no secret that the Social Security program faces a very real threat of running out of money. Thanks to impressive advancements in the medical world, the ratio of workers to retirees is now decreasing too quickly, and the future availability of retirement funds for millions of Americans is in serious doubt. Internal agency assessments predict that the program’s trust fund reserves will be completely depleted by 2034 unless significant reforms are enacted before then.
Of course, many open-border advocates use this as an opportunity to call for more mass-immigration, including amnesty for millions of illegal aliens, to immediately boost the number of workers in the United States.
A ‘Temporary’ Swamp Creature Might Have Gained Some Credibility
Check out what Dave wrote in the Daily Caller:
Only in the stagnant swamps of Washington, DC, could a public policy with the word “temporary” in its title gain a sense of permanence, but that is exactly what has happened to Temporary Protected Status (TPS).
TPS was a benevolent policy enacted in 1990 to provide temporary safe haven to those who were visiting or temporarily living in the United States – such as tourists or students – when civil strife or a natural disaster suddenly struck back home, making their immediate return either very difficult or dangerous.
The Left Doesn’t Just Oppose Merit-Based Immigration, They Openly Embrace Failure
Check out what Ira wrote in the Town Hall:
The idea of a merit-based immigration policy originated on the political left. It was first proposed by a blue ribbon panel, chaired by a civil rights movement icon, Barbara Jordan, in the 1990s. The commission’s recommendations for an immigration overhaul were immediately endorsed by President Bill Clinton and other leading Democrats and Republicans of the day and then, just as quickly, mothballed due to objections from ethnic interest advocacy groups and powerful cheap labor business interests.