Tag Archives: Immigration

Let The Lawsuits Begin

Posted on by

Sara Carter reported yesterday that the Texas attorney general has filed a federal lawsuit Friday against the Biden administration over its order to freeze most deportations for the next 100 days.

The article reports:

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) argues that DHS is breaking immigration law by ordering the deportation freeze in the complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas. His statement also claims that the new orders violate the U.S. Constitution, federal immigration and administrative law, and a contractual agreement between Texas and the DHS.

“In one of its first of dozens of steps that harm Texas and the nation as a whole, the Biden administration directed DHS to violate federal immigration law and breach an agreement to consult and cooperate with Texas on that law,” Paxton said in a statement. “Our state defends the largest section of the southern border in the nation. Failure to properly enforce the law will directly and immediately endanger our citizens and law enforcement personnel.”

Moreover, Paxton’s lawsuit asserts that the DHS’s authority does not extend to such a policy.

“If left unchallenged, DHS could re-assert this suspension power for a longer period or even indefinitely, effectively granting a blanket amnesty to illegal aliens that Congress has refused to pass time and time again,” the filing says. “The Constitution, controlling statutes, and prior Executive pledges prevent a seismic change to this country’s immigration laws merely by memorandum.”

Deportation is a necessary part of immigration policy. A person who is in America illegally who commits a crime needs to be deported before his actions endanger the lives of Americans. There are no promises that this case will actually get heard, but the Attorney General is right to pursue it. Congress is supposed to make immigration laws–they are not supposed to be made by Executive Order.

If Presidential Debates Happen, The Will Be Interesting

Posted on by

Breitbart posted an article today about a recent comment made by Presidential Candidate Joe Biden.

The comment:

“unlike the African American community, with notable exceptions, the Latino community is an incredibly diverse community.”

Wow.

The article reports:

National Public Radio’s Lulu Garcia-Navarro asked Biden about whether he would stop the deportation of Cubans.

“I’m going to look at every single country in the world … this guy [President Donald Trump] is sending them back,” Biden said, promising to extend the Temporary Protected Status (TPS) program on his first day in office — one of several such first-day promises Biden has made.

Garcia-Navarro followed up, asking whether Biden would attempt to restore the Obama-Biden administration’s policy of improving relations with communist Cuba.

“Yes,” he said.

Biden then went on to add:

“And by the way, w hat you all know, but most people don’t know, unlike the African American community, with notable exceptions, the Latino community is an incredibly diverse community, with incredibly different attitudes about different things … it’s a very diverse community.”

Biden attempted to explain that point by arguing that Latinos in Florida and Arizona had different views on immigration.

Garcia-Navarro did not ask Biden why he thought the black community was not diverse. She moved on to a different topic.

I think there are a number of black conservatives who might argue that the African American community is diverse and quite capable of thinking as individuals rather as a monolithic group.

An Interesting Campaign Donation

Posted on by

On Friday The Washington Free Beacon reported that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) funneled $14,000 to Rep. Ilhan Omar’s campaign. Ilhan Omar is in a primary race with four challengers, including attorney Antone Melton-Meaux, who outraised Omar significantly in the second quarter of 2020.

The article reports:

The impressive fundraising haul allowed Melton-Meaux to spend more than $1.7 million over the first three weeks of July. Omar, meanwhile, spent just $784,000. More than $600,000—77 percent of those disbursements—went to a D.C.-based consulting firm run by Omar’s new husband.

Following his spending spree, Melton-Meaux holds $695,000 on hand, down from the $2 million he held at the end of the second quarter. Omar holds $732,000 on hand.

Omar, who did not respond to a request for comment, will square off against Melton-Meaux and three additional Democratic challengers during the state’s August 11 primary election. The late push from Pelosi suggests genuine concern for Omar, who has butted heads with the California Democrat in the past. Pelosi criticized Omar for using “deeply offensive” anti-Semitic tropes in February 2019 and condemned the Boycott Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel, which Omar supports, a month later. Omar quickly hit back, saying, “a condemnation for people that want to exercise their First Amendment rights is beneath any leader.” Melton-Meaux has campaigned against Omar’s support for BDS.

Ilhan Omar has some interesting skeletons in her closet. She has been charged with immigration fraud in order to get into America, and her funneling money to her now husband’s consulting firm has raised questions about her basic integrity. Her anti-Semitic comments have also put her in a negative light in some circles. It is interesting that Nancy Pelosi has chosen to support her in her primary campaign.

Who Is Writing The Democrat Party Platform?

Posted on by

Bernie Sanders is not the Democrat presidential candidate. He might have been, but the Democrat political establishment has blocked his nomination twice with backroom deals. However, the proposed party platform seems to have a lot of his ideas included. The Democrats blocked his nomination because they felt that his ideas were too far out of the mainstream for him to be elected, so now they are sneaking his ideas into a platform that very few people will actually read. Yesterday Breitbart posted an article about that platform.

The article reports:

The proposed Democrat platform would expand asylum for migrants arriving at the U.S.-Mexico border, freeing them into the interior of the nation while they await their hearings. Gallup research from 2018 finds that nearly 160 million migrants around the world would move to the U.S. if given the opportunity — five million of which are located in Central America.

Likewise, the plan ends construction of the border wall, halts deportations for illegal aliens, ends all travel bans on national security-risk nations, China, Europe, Brazil, and Iran, ends agreements between the U.S. and Central America to reduce illegal immigration, and ends most federal detention of illegal aliens.

The plan also calls for:

    • Restarting DACA for young illegal aliens
    • Restraining DAPA for the illegal parents of DACA illegal aliens
    • Rescinding Trump’s “national emergency” at the border
    • Increasing refugee resettlement
    • Gives Obamacare to DACA illegal aliens
    • Forces Americans to subsidize welfare-dependent legal immigration
    • Expands the scandal-plagued U visa program
    • Restarts employment-based green card system

The massive expansion of illegal and legal immigration — in addition to the hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens and more than 2.5 million legal immigrants and foreign workers added to the U.S. population every year — would come as more than 35 million Americans are unemployed or underemployed.

This is not a recipe for American success. This is a recipe for creating a permanent underclass of people who will be forever dependent on the government and eventually bankrupt the country (see Cloward-Piven Strategy). Every illegal alien that enters the country depresses the wages of Americans in low-skilled jobs. A country needs to have control of its borders in order to protect the rights and futures of those who live there.

Who is writing the Democratic Party platform, and what is their goal?

Ending Something That Should Never Have Had A Beginning

Posted on by

Yesterday The Gateway Pundit posted an article about the revoking of the the JR Motel’s conditional use permit and the order to the Motel to shut down by the end of the month. So what was the problem?

The article reports:

The JR Motel does not rent rooms to the public, instead, they only cater to wealthy Chinese families who travel to the states to give birth and take advantage of America’s birthright citizenship.

“Though the practice isn’t illegal, city officials said such long-term residency at the motel fits the category of a boarding or lodging house, and the location, 428 E. Lincoln Avenue, is not zoned for either,” the OC Register reports.

The article explains:

California is a popular destination for birth tourism.

“In 2015, federal agents raided homes and apartments across Southern California in a first-of-its-kind raid targeting birth tourism companies. Last December, an Irvine woman was sentenced to a 10-month-prison term, believed to be the first sentence handed to a birth tourism operator helping foreign nationals commit immigration and visa fraud. The woman had already served that time in prison and was released upon sentencing, which included an order of deportation. She didn’t wait to be deported, her attorney said, and left for China in early January,” the Register report concluded.

It is time to end the practice of granting citizenship to anyone born here regardless of the citizenship of their parents. According to Numbers USA, The United States and Canada are the only developed nations in the world to still offer Birthright Citizenship to tourists and illegal aliens. Obviously the Chinese tourists are not here illegally, but they are here taking advantage of a loophole in American laws. At some point we need to realize that China is not our friend and end this practice.

Taking Charge Of Immigration

Posted on by

Yesterday One America News reported that the Supreme Court ruled five to four to expand the “public charge” rule across the entire country. This is the rule that allows states to deny green cards to people that they feel will rely on public assistance. We need to remember that immigrants who arrived in America before the War on Poverty had to provide for their own needs. They were the people who built this country. Unfortunately we are now in a situation where many immigrants come here for what they can get, not what they can contribute.

The article reports:

“President Trump’s administration is reinforcing the ideals of self-sufficiency and personal responsibility, ensuring that immigrants are able to support themselves and become successful here in America,” stated USCIS Director Ken Cuccinelli.

The Department of Homeland Security defined the scope of “public charge” in August 2019. They expanded it to include immigrants who are likely to use public benefits like Medicaid, food stamp and housing vouchers.

Several states, including California, New York and Illinois, issued “universal” injunctions to stop enforcement of the rule across the country.

“It is a point of principle that we stand up at a moment like this, as a state, and assert ourselves,” said Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-Calif.). “(We will) protect not only the values of the state, but the remarkable diversity that we represent within this state.”

Last month, the high court struck down the injunctions and expanded the rule to every state except Illinois, which has been since included in the ruling.

Advocates have urged immigrants not to be afraid of signing up for public assistance. They claimed the affected population will be small.

“The people who are actually, directly impacted by this is very small,” said Immigration Advocates Network Director Rodrigo Camarena. “We should remind our immigrant friends and neighbors that, in all likelihood, this decision does not affect you.”

First of all, we need to do away with the idea of ‘universal injunctions.’ There is no way under our Constitution that one state should be able to control the actions of another state.

The article concludes:

The new order will allow the federal government to enforce the “public charge” rule without being blocked, but courts will still be able to appeal the rule in their state.

The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in Illinois will hear oral arguments on the issue next week. The new rule will take effect nationwide on Monday.

Keep in mind that the Democrats need a dependent class in order to win elections. That is what this is really about.

Don’t Believe Everything You See In A Campaign Ad

Posted on by

President Trump has tried from the beginning of his presidency to end the flood of illegal immigrants coming into this country from our southern border. The Democrat party has fought him every step of the way. Their goal is eventually to change the demographic of the American voter to give them a permanent majority. Of course, admitting that is not an option, but Democrats continue to work to leave our southern border open. We can expect this issue to come up in the 2020 presidential campaign, but don’t look for honesty on the part of Democrat candidates.

The Daily Caller reported today:

Mike Bloomberg, the former mayor of New York City and contender for the Democratic presidential nomination, released an anti-Trump campaign advertisement that included footage of caged migrants in 2014 — during the Obama era.

The Bloomberg campaign released an ad that was meant to highlight unflattering events that have occurred during the Trump administration, such as the white nationalist march in Charlottesville, Virginia, the aftermath of a Florida school shooting, the Brett Kavanaugh hearings, and immigration enforcement at the U.S.-Mexico border.

Note that the footage was from the Obama administration–not from the Trump administration. This is patently dishonest.

The article concludes:

The DCNF reached out to Julie Wood — a spokeswoman for the Bloomberg campaign — about the image, but did not receive a response.

This is not the first time Obama-era footage of caged migrants has been mistakenly attributed to the Trump administration. In an announcement about “inhumane treatment at the border” in July 2019, Democrats on the House Oversight Committee tweeted out the same Getty image. They deleted their tweet following online ridicule.

It really is a shame that political ads cannot be stopped from airing if they fail to tell the truth.

Common Sense In Immigration Policy

Posted on by

On Monday CNBC posted an article about a Supreme Court decision regarding President Trump’s immigration policy.

The article reports:

The Supreme Court said Monday that it will allow the Trump administration’s “public charge” rule to take effect after the immigration policy had been blocked by lower courts.

The 5-4 vote was divided along partisan lines, with the court’s four Democratic appointees indicating that they would not have allowed the policy to be enforced.

The court’s five conservatives, including Chief Justice John Roberts, formed the majority siding with the administration. The decision came as Roberts was presiding over President Donald Trump’s impeachment trial in the Senate.

The rule, which was proposed in August, will make it more difficult for immigrants to obtain permanent residency, or green cards, if they have used or are likely to use public benefits like food stamps and Medicaid.

Under previous federal rules, a more narrow universe of public benefits, such as cash assistance and long-term hospitalization, were considered in determining whether an immigrant was likely to become a “public charge.”

The following statistics are from the Center for Immigration Studies:

  • No single program explains non-citizens’ higher overall welfare use. For example, not counting school lunch and breakfast, welfare use is still 61 percent for non-citizen households compared to 33 percent for natives. Not counting Medicaid, welfare use is 55 percent for immigrants compared to 30 percent for natives.
  • Welfare use tends to be high for both newer arrivals and long-time residents. Of households headed by non-citizens in the United States for fewer than 10 years, 50 percent use one or more welfare programs; for those here more than 10 years, the rate is 70 percent.
  • Welfare receipt by working households is very common. Of non-citizen households receiving welfare, 93 percent have at least one worker, as do 76 percent of native households receiving welfare. In fact, non-citizen households are more likely overall to have a worker than are native households.1
  • The primary reason welfare use is so high among non-citizens is that a much larger share of non-citizens have modest levels of education and, as a result, they often earn low wages and qualify for welfare at higher rates than natives.
  • Of all non-citizen households, 58 percent are headed by immigrants who have no more than a high school education, compared to 36 percent of native households.
  • Of households headed by non-citizens with no more than a high school education, 81 percent access one or more welfare programs. In contrast, 28 percent of non-citizen households headed by a college graduate use one or more welfare programs.
  • Like non-citizens, welfare use also varies significantly for natives by educational attainment, with the least educated having much higher welfare use than the most educated.
  • Using education levels and likely future income to determine the probability of welfare use among new green card applicants — and denying permanent residency to those likely to utilize such programs — would almost certainly reduce welfare use among future permanent residents.
  • Of households headed by naturalized immigrants (U.S. citizens), 50 percent used one or more welfare programs. Naturalized-citizen households tend to have lower welfare use than non-citizen households for most types of programs, but higher use rates than native households for virtually every major program.
  • Welfare use is significantly higher for non-citizens than for natives in all four top immigrant-receiving states. In California, 72 percent of non-citizen-headed households use one or more welfare programs, compared to 35 percent for native-headed households. In Texas, the figures are 69 percent vs. 35 percent; in New York they are 53 percent vs. 38 percent; and in Florida, 56 percent of non-citizen-headed households use at least welfare program, compared to 35 percent of native households.

At this point I need to say that I am not against helping people in need, but we do need to get our priorities in order. Our Veterans’ Administration health system is horrible. It is underfunded and does not have the facilities necessary to meet the needs of our returning veterans. We have been at war for eighteen years, and we have broken faith with those who have fought those wars. Shouldn’t taking care of those veterans be a higher priority than taking care of people who are not American citizens? Look at the budget deficits we are running–we can’t afford to do both.

I applaud the Supreme Court for upholding a common-sense approach to immigration.

Fixing A Broken Law

Posted on by

The Daily Signal posted an article yesterday about the State Department’s beginning to look into what to do about ‘birth tourism.’

The article reports:

“Birth tourism” has become big business. Today, hundreds of companies advertise to pregnant women—particularly upper-middle-class women from China, Nigeria, Russia, and Turkey—offering assistance to get visas that would allow them to visit the U.S. during the time they expect to give birth.

The U.S. hosts tens of thousands of “birth tourists” every year. In 2015, the Center for Immigration Studies pegged the number at 35,000. The Qianzhan Industry Research Institute reported that, in 2016, as many as 80,000 birth tourists came to the U.S. Whatever the total number, it appears to be growing.

What draws these women to our shores isn’t U.S. obstetric or natal care. It’s automatic U.S. citizenship for their babies.

The 14th Amendment declares: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, [emphasis added] are citizens of the United States … .” The government currently interprets this as meaning that anyone born on U.S. soil is a U.S. citizen, regardless of the parent’s nationality or immigration status. Essentially, this reading ignores the qualifying phrase italicized above.

The article lists some of the reasons behind the growth of ‘birth tourism’:

U.S. citizenship makes a child eligible for free public education and loan programs, government food assistance, Medicaid, and other welfare programs. Costs can run into the billions. Furthermore, when birth-tourist babies become adults, they may then apply for immigrant visas (green cards) for their family members, increasing chain migration.

The wealth of benefits offered by the U.S. are a major selling point for the birth tourism industry. Last January, the Justice Department unsealed indictments for 19 people involved in Chinese birth tourism schemes.

The indictments revealed that the “birthing house” operators told pregnant women that they could seek U.S. visas to obtain the “most attractive nationality,” “priority for jobs in U.S. government,” “free education from junior high to public high school,” and “senior supplement benefits when the parent is living overseas.”

After paying a fee—which ranged from $15,000 to $50,000—each client received coaching on how to pass visa interviews; overstay visas once in the U.S.; and apply for federal benefits.

This kind of fraudulent behavior not only undermines the integrity of our immigration system, it generates national security concerns, as well.

The article concludes:

President Donald Trump has heard the call of those clamoring for an end to birthright citizenship and has pledged to end the policy. Since the 14th Amendment does not require universal birthright citizenship, a constitutional amendment is not necessary to change current policy. All that’s needed is a new policy.

And that’s exactly what the State Department is issuing—a final rule designed to combat birth tourism in the United States.

Specifically, the rule amends the State Department’s regulation on temporary visitors seeking a “B” (business or pleasure) nonimmigrant visa. It stipulates that such visas are granted to accommodate temporary visits for pleasure and not visits taken for the primary purpose of giving birth in this country.

It also states that, if a consular officer has reason to believe that a visa applicant would give birth while in the U.S., he or she may presume that the primary purpose is to gain citizenship for the unborn child. Unless the applicant is able to rebut that presumption, she would be ineligible for the visa.

Ending birthright citizenship would restore order to our immigration system, decrease welfare costs, and improve national security. The State Department’s new rule to combat birth tourism is a good first step.

This is definitely a move in the right direction.

The Biggest Lie Told In Last Night’s Debate

Posted on by

Breitbart posted an article last night which detailed the biggest lie told in the Democratic debate in Iowa.

The article reports:

Blue-collar and white-collar Americans “are being clobbered, they’re being killed,” former Vice President Joe Biden claimed at the January 14 Democrat debate in Iowa.

However, unemployment is at record lows, many sidelined Americans are getting jobs, and blue-collar wages are rising at rates not seen for many years amid President Donald Trump’s new curbs on legal and illegal immigration.

The article quotes Joe Biden’s remarks:

Working-class people — where I come from in Pennsylvania, the places I come from in Delaware — I have great support. I have support across the board, and I’m not worried about taking on Donald Trump at all. And with regard to the economy I can hardly wait to have a debate with him.

Where I come from — the neighborhoods I come from — they’re in real trouble: working-class people and middle-class people. When the middle class does well, [the] working class has a way up and the wealthy do well. But what’s happening now: they’re being clobbered, they’re being killed. They now have a situation where they [believe] — the vast majority believe — their children will never reach the stage that they reached in economic security.

I love that [economic] debate because the American public is getting clobbered. The wealthy are the only ones doing well. Period. I’m looking forward to the economic debate.

The article reports the facts:

Wages for blue-collar Americans rose by 4.3 percent in 2019 — or 2.7 percent after inflation — in President Donald Trump’s tightening labor market, according to a December report by Goldman Sachs.

The wage gains come amid very low inflation of just 2.1 percent in December.

…Blue-collar wages are rising faster than white-collar salaries because of different demands from employers, said Tom Donohue, the CEO of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. “White-collar wages have been moving up over time, a bit, and the demand there, because of technology and other things, is not as high as the demand [for blue-collar skills]. … It’s a reality of the market,” he said January 9.

But Biden wants to increase the flow of foreign workers who will reduce wages for Americans.

“Biden will work with Congress to first reform temporary visas to establish a wage-based allocation process and establish enforcement mechanisms to ensure they are aligned with the labor market and not used to undermine wages,” said Biden’s plan for legal immigration. “Then, Biden will support expanding the number of high-skilled visas and eliminating the limits on employment-based visas by country, which create unacceptably long backlogs,” the plan says.

Hopefully enough Americans are familiar with the actual facts to believe this garbage.

Voting With Their Feet

Posted on by

Breitbart is reporting today that the population of the State of New York dropped by about 77,000 residents over the last year — the steepest statewide population drop in the United States.

The article notes:

New Census Bureau data released this week reveals that ten states in the U.S. saw their populations decline from 2018 to 2019. New York saw the largest decline with nearly 77,000 residents fleeing the state, helping to drop the population by about 0.4 percent.

…Likewise, Illinois lost about 51,250 residents over the last year, while West Virginia’s population declined by about 12,000 residents. About 11,000 residents fled Louisiana, 6,200 residents left Connecticut, 4,900 left Mississippi, 4,700 left Hawaii, more than 3,800 left New Jersey, about 3,600 left Alaska, and about 370 left Vermont.

In New York, between 2018 and 2019, about 45,753 foreign-born residents were added to the population, which is the lowest level of immigration to the state since 2010 and the second-lowest level in nearly 60 years, according to an Empire Center analysis published in the New York Post.

“The cost of living in New York — the high taxes, regulations, and housing costs — are making it untenable to live the American dream here,” New York City Councilman for Staten Island Joe Borelli told the Post. “It’s hard to see how this changes with progressive Democrats entrenched in government.”

The article concludes:

New York’s population decline comes as mass immigration and rapid corporate development by billionaire developers, with the approval of Mayor Bill de Blasio (D), has helped drive up rents and housing costs in New York City. The results have forced working and middle-class Americans out of the state.

Between 2005 and 2017, household incomes for single adults in New York grew by less than two percent per year, a study by the state’s comptroller found. At the same time, overall median rents in New York City increased by about four percent per year, resulting in a 61 percent rent hike for one-bedroom apartments and a 53 percent rent hike for two-bedroom apartments.

This is information you can’t ignore, even if you don’t live in one of the states that is losing population. When New York State (and probably California) finally declare bankruptcy because of bad fiscal policies, the rest of the states will be called on to bail them out. I have no idea how that will work, but I am ready to guarantee it will happen. States that practice fiscal sanity will be asked to bail out states that practice fiscal insanity. The only way that works is if the states practicing fiscal insanity are willing to change their ways. This could get very interesting.

Leadership Matters

Posted on by

Breitbart is reporting today that thanks to the immigration policies enacted by former Interior Minister Matteo Salvini, illegal migrant landings have been cut in half in 2019.

The article reports:

According to the ministry, the country saw 23,210 arrivals in 2018 which then reduced to 11,439 in 2019, although the number of arrivals has dramatically increased since Salvini and his League party left the government in August and were replaced by the leftist Democratic Party, Il Giornale reports.

Salvini, who closed Italian ports to migrant transport NGOs, is largely credited with dramatically reducing the number of drowning deaths in the Mediterranean sea.

The populist League leader slammed the leftist government coalition for the rise of new arrivals in recent months saying: “Even in December the landings increased compared to the same period a year ago.”

Since the new government took over, the number of migrants has increased.

The article concludes:

According to Il Giornale, the number of new migrants has increased since the new coalition took power in September, compared to the same period last year and claimed that the current government was taking credit for policies enacted by Salvini, rather than their own record.

The policies of Salvini remain popular in Italy, with the League topping opinion polls for months and Salvini himself consistently being voted the most trusted politician in the country, ahead of current Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte.

The coalition of the Five Star Movement and the Democratic Party, however, remains unpopular with the vast majority of the Italian public with some polls showing Salvini’s League with nearly as much support as both parties combined.

Cracks in the government coalition have also begun to emerge in recent weeks, with three Five Star Movement senators defecting to the League earlier this month.

Stay tuned. Around the world, average citizens of any country do not want to see their country inundated by illegal immigrants who have no intention of assimilation or contributing to the culture of the country they are entering. It is disheartening to see pictures of young men pouring into foreign countries rather than working to improve conditions in their own countries.

Common Sense Comes To Montgomery County Maryland

Posted on by

On Monday The Daily Caller posted an article about some recent changes to Montgomery County, Maryland, laws dealing with people who are in America illegally.

The article reports:

Following months of national media coverage over the handling of illegal aliens in his custody, Montgomery County, Maryland, Executive Marc Elrich has somewhat reversed a sanctuary policy he signed into law.

Elrich will allow Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents the ability to access certain areas of the Montgomery County jail in order to apprehend illegal aliens, according to ABC7 News. A county spokesman confirmed to the local news outlet on Nov. 1 that correctional officers have been ordered to give ICE agents clearance to “identified areas” of the jail to “ensure that transfers are conducted in a safe environment.”

News of the cooperation between Montgomery County and federal immigration authorities comes three months after Elrich signed an executive order that prohibited county officials from working with ICE.

After Marc Elrich signed the executive order, there were a number of illegal aliens arrested in Montgomery County who were charged with rape and other sexual assault crimes. The national news picked up the story, and the executive order became controversial.

The article concludes:

It’s not clear if Elrich’s rollback of his sanctuary rules are sufficient enough for federal immigration authorities. ICE did not respond to a request for comment from the DCNF.

There are caveats to the renewed cooperation, however. Before arriving at the county jail, ICE must submit an immigration detainer and arrive before the wanted illegal alien is released. If, for some reason, ICE agents are not able to arrive on time, the individual is released into the public — even if the individual has been charged with murder, rape or other heinous crime.

It’s not perfect, but it’s a start.

It’s Working

Posted on by

President Trump’s policy on immigration has been mocked, blocked, and generally fought by Democrats and Chamber of Commerce Republicans. The President has continued to push ahead and get things done. Now we have the numbers to show that he has been successful.

Yesterday Fox News posted an article with the following headline, “Thousands of migrants sent back to Mexico under Trump policy have given up their asylum claims: DHS.”

The article reports:

Thousands of migrants returned to Mexico under the Trump administration’s “Remain in Mexico” policy have given up their asylum claims, with many of them returning home, according to statistics included in a new assessment of the policy released this week by the Department of Homeland Security.

The policy, known formally as the Migrant Protection Protocols, sends migrants seeking asylum at the southern border back to Mexico for the duration of immigration proceedings. It is a cornerstone of the administration’s efforts to end “catch and release,” by which migrants are released into the U.S. while their cases are heard.

The article notes the following:

So far, the administration has returned more than 55,000 migrants to Mexico. The assessment describes the policy as an “indispensable tool in addressing the ongoing crisis at the southern border and restoring integrity to the immigration system.” It says that it has completed almost 13,000 cases as of Oct. 21.

The article concludes:

The new assessment, significantly, cites estimates from Customs and Border Protection (CBP) that approximately 20,000 migrants are currently being sheltered in Mexico near the U.S. border as they still seek entry to the U.S. The assessment says that number, though, suggests “a significant proportion of the 55,000+ MPP (Migrant Protection Protocols) returnees have chosen to abandon their claims.”

The report notes that the work of the International Organization of Migration, supported in part by the U.S. government, is helping migrants return home for free if they choose to do so. It says that as of October, almost 900 migrants have participated in that program.

The statistics put some meat on the bones of what officials have been saying for months, specifically that many of those in MPP — particularly those who do not have a legitimate asylum claim — realize that they will not be released into the interior and then just return home. Those returning migrants may then dissuade others from making the journey, reducing one of the “pull factors” bringing people north illegally.

“We’re now sending the message that, if you’re coming here as an economic migrant, you’re not going to be allowed into the United States,” Acting CBP Commissioner Mark Morgan, who has called MPP a “game-changer,” told reporters this month. “That’s driving a lot of people to return.”

The MPP policy has been one of the most effective parts of the administration’s crackdown on asylum seekers and illegal immigration, but also one of the most controversial. Critics claim that migrants are being sent into camps with squalid conditions, and are also at risk of violence from cartels.

A country without a border cannot defend itself. We have not stopped the drugs and illegal immigrants coming into American, but we have decreased the numbers. It’s a good start.

The President’s Immigration Policies Are Working

Posted on by

Breitbart is reporting today that new immigration procedures implemented by Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO) effectively disbanded a group of 2,000 mostly Central American caravan migrants.

The article reports:

Immigration policies put in place following an agreement between Mexico and the Trump Administration broke up a caravan consisting of approximately 2,000 people from Central America, Africa, and the Caribbean Islands, the Associated Press reported Saturday. The group began to move northward from Tapachula, Chiapas, early one morning last week after being held up for official travel documents. The group quickly encountered Mexican Federal Police and members of the newly formed National Guard.

When the group came upon the police and soldiers, some scattered while others surrendered.

“This caravan no longer exists,” migrant rights advocate Irineo Mujica told the AP.

The migrants are provided opportunities to request asylum in Mexico. Instead, the group chose to illegally attempt to move through Mexico to the U.S. border.

“I want to pass through Mexico, I don’t want to live here,” Amado Ramirez expressed. Reportedly traveling with his wife and young children, he said he hoped to obtain documents allowing him to pass through Mexico.

The article concludes:

Under the agreement between Mexico and the United States, Mexican immigration officials give the migrants two choices — stay in Mexico or leave via Mexico’s southern border. Many are flown back to their countries of origin. African migrants have a more difficult path as their home countries often lack the infrastructure to handle mass repatriations, the AP stated.

Migrant support groups reported that the presence of the National Guard and other law enforcement officials in southern Mexico made the process for moving north very difficult.

Large group migration through Mexico to the U.S. southern border hit a 12-year high during Fiscal Year 2019. However, changes in Mexican policies negotiated by the Trump Administration effectively dropped the numbers from a high mark of nearly 133,000 in May to about 40,000 in September, Breitbart Texas reported. By the end of the fiscal year, U.S. Border Patrol agents apprehended an estimated 850,000.

Migrant families and unaccompanied minors made up for nearly two-thirds of the apprehensions in the U.S.

President Trump threatened Mexico with high tariffs if they did not end the caravans passing through their country and entering the United States illegally. What we are seeing is an American President who understands that because of America’s strong economy, we can use economic leverage to persuade other countries to do what is right.

What Voting Base Is She Trying To Appeal To?

Posted on by

Yesterday Breitbart posted an article about a plank on Elizabeth Warren’s platform. Ms. Warren has decided that people who are here illegally should receive back pay for work they have done in the past.

The article reports:

Ensuring employers can’t exploit undocumented workers and drive down standards for all workers: The 2002 Supreme Court case Hoffman Plastic Compounds v. NLRB held that an undocumented worker could not receive the backpay he was owed from an employer who had violated the NLRA. That 5–4 ruling is wrong and denies millions of undocumented workers redress for illegal firings or other retaliatory conduct by an employer. The case encourages employers to hire undocumented immigrants and exploit them in numerous fields, including construction and manufacturing, which could lower wages for all workers. I will fight to amend the NLRA to end this form of exploitation and ensure that all workers are protected. [Emphasis added]

The article concludes:

Absent from Warren’s workers plan is a mandate and punishment for employers and businesses who hire illegal aliens over American citizens, as well as a reform to the H-1B visa program whereby Americans are readily replaced by foreign visa workers to increase profit margins for multinational corporations.

Warren has not endorsed mandatory E-Verify — a system that prevents businesses from hiring illegal aliens over Americans — though it would decrease foreign competition against Americans, especially those most vulnerable to competing against illegal aliens in the labor market.

In contrast to Warren is President Trump’s populist-nationalist “Buy American, Hire American” agenda, which has sought to increase interior immigration enforcement to tighten the labor market and delivered wage hikes for America’s blue-collar and working class. Unlike Warren, Trump’s latest national immigration plan includes a nationwide mandate of E-Verify to prevent Americans from being forced to compete for jobs against illegal aliens.

Today, there are at least eight million illegal aliens holding American jobs in the U.S. economy that would have otherwise gone to American workers and legal immigrants. In most cases, these illegal workers obtain fraudulent work authorization documents or steal American citizens’ identities in order to take jobs.

The Democrats have become a party that favors people who are here illegally over American workers. Because Americans are supposedly the only people with voting rights, I would love to know what Ms. Warren feels she is accomplishing with this policy idea.

Protecting The Pocketbooks Of Taxpayers

Posted on by

Yesterday Breitbart reported that President Trump signed a presidential proclamation on Friday that will prevent American taxpayers from being forced to subsidize the healthcare costs of legal immigrants wanting to permanently resettle in the United States. Keep in mind that the government in itself has no money and no income–any money it has it has taken from the people who earned it.

The article reports:

In a new rule, beginning November 3, foreign nationals applying for visas — not including refugees, asylees, or those on nonimmigrant visas — will have to prove that they will have either employer-based health insurance before arriving in the U.S. or a non-subsidized private health insurance plan.

The proclamation reads:

While our healthcare system grapples with the challenges caused by uncompensated care, the United States Government is making the problem worse by admitting thousands of aliens who have not demonstrated any ability to pay for their healthcare costs. Notably, data show that lawful immigrants are about three times more likely than United States citizens to lack health insurance. Immigrants who enter this country should not further saddle our healthcare system, and subsequently American taxpayers, with higher costs.

The article further reports:

Research by the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) has found that immigrant households, currently, are 44 percent more likely to be on Medicaid than households headed by native-born Americans. While about 23 percent of native-born American households are on Medicaid, about 50 percent of immigrant households consume Medicaid.

The article concludes:

Currently, there is an estimated record high of 44.5 million foreign-born residents living in the U.S. This is nearly quadruple the immigrant population in 2000. The vast majority of those arriving in the country every year are low-skilled legal immigrants who compete against working and middle-class Americans for jobs.

We need to revisit our immigration policies. For those who claim that America has always welcomed immigrants, that is true. However, we welcomed immigrants who came to this country to prosper and support themselves. We never supported the idea of Americans paying the expenses of an unlimited number of immigrants. That is national suicide.

Suspended For Following The Law

Posted on by

The lack of respect for basic legal principles on the part of some of our elected officials is getting totally out of control. It used to be understood that if you broke the law, you got arrested, and possibly spent some time in jail. Now it depends on which law, which police department, and whether or not you are here illegally. There is no consistent rule of law anymore.

Yesterday Fox News posted an article about a Virginia police officer who has been suspended from his job.

The article reports:

A Virginia police officer was suspended after allegedly turning over a suspected undocumented immigrant to federal authorities following a traffic accident last month.

The Fairfax County Police Department didn’t identify the officer in a statement released Tuesday but said the incident occurred on Sept. 21 when an officer was dispatched to a car accident.

The officer discovered one of the drivers didn’t have a Virginia driver’s license and ran a check with the state Department of Motor Vehicles, police said. The check revealed the driver had a violation for failing to appear for a deportation hearing.

The officer verified the warrant and alerted officials with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

An ICE agent was close by and arrived at the scene. The officer cited the driver for not having a driver’s license and turned them over to the federal agent.

The Fairfax County Police Department enacted a 2007 policy that prohibits officers from confirming a person’s immigration status and detaining them solely based on civil violations of immigration law.

“This is an unfortunate issue where the officer was confused,” Police Chief Edwin Roessler Jr. said. “We have trained on this issue a lot. This is the first time we’ve had a lapse in judgment, and the officer is being punished.”

The article concludes:

The officer involved has been on the job for a few years, Roessler told The Washington Post. He added that the officer did not willfully violate the department’s policy with respect to cooperating with immigration officials.

He said the officer will undergo remedial training.

I think the people in charge need to undergo remedial training.

Ignoring The Economic Implications

Posted on by

Yesterday Breitbart posted an article about some recent comments by Senator Elizabeth Warren about immigration. Senator Warren is either unaware of the impact of unskilled immigrant workers on American workers’ wages or she is simply ignoring the facts.

The article reports her comments:

We need a pathway to citizenship for the people who are here and here to stay. They are our neighbors; they are our brothers and sisters. They are here. We need a path — not just for DREAMers — but also a path for grandmas, and for little kids, and for people who came here to work on farms, and for students who overstayed their visas. We need a path that is fair and achievable. Bring people out of the shadows. It is good for all workers, and we need to get them into our unions. [Emphasis added]

The article notes:

Similarly, Warren is promising to expand legal immigration levels, which are already at historically record-high rates. About 1.2 million mostly low-skilled legal immigrants are admitted every year, not including the hundreds of thousands who arrive on temporary visas to compete against Americans for jobs.

…Research by analyst Steven Camarotta has found that every one percent increase in the immigrant portion of American workers’ occupations reduces their weekly wages by about 0.5 percent. This means the average native-born American worker today has his weekly wages reduced by perhaps 8.5 percent because of current legal immigration levels.

While Warren seeks to increase foreign competition against American workers in the labor market, President Donald Trump has pursued policy initiatives to decrease competition, increasing U.S. wages and giving American workers leverage over businesses.

I would like to see people who came here illegally ‘come out of the shadows.’ They need to have some sort of way that they can work to support themselves. However, I don’t want people who came here illegally to be put ahead of people who are going through the legal process to become citizens. That is simply unfair. I am willing to let people who come here illegally have access to legal employment, but I think people who came here illegally should be put in line to become citizens–at the end of the current line. Breaking the law should not result in special privileges.

Is This The Future We Want For America?

Posted on by

Breitbart posted an article today about a tax crisis in Sweden. The causes are something Americans need to consider as our southern border continues to be seen as a political issue rather than a national security and economic issue.

The article reports:

A Swedish municipality that took in one of the highest numbers of asylum seekers per population faces a crisis as natives move out and decimate the local tax base.

The municipality of Filipstad took in many asylum seekers during the migrant crisis of 2015 and now are facing increasing costs as unemployment among migrants has surged and financial assistance rates have tripled, broadcaster SVT reports.

Claes Hultgren, the local municipal manager, described the situation, saying of the migrant population: “In this group, unemployment and dependency are very high, while education levels are very low. This group runs the risk of ending in an eternal alienation that is already heavily burdening the municipal economy.”

The article concludes:

While many cities across Sweden are facing housing shortages, the rate of unemployment between native Swedes and migrants is stark.

A 2018 report stated that the unemployment rate for native Swedes was a mere 3.6 per cent while the foreign-born rate was much higher at 19.9 per cent. The city of Malmo, which has a high migration-background population, was shown to have double the national unemployment average.

At some point, we need to realize that generosity has to have limits. You can only accept a certain amount of people who are dependent on others for their basic needs before those policies have a negative impact on the people who are working to meet their own basic needs. Charity is a wonderful part of life, but it has to be voluntary and it has to be within the bounds of ability. The number of immigrants coming into Europe and America who have no marketable skills and do not know the language is a burden on the economics of the countries involved. Immigration needs to be controlled, and assimilation needs to be part of immigration.

Our Legal System Is Being Used Against Us

Posted on by

The Gateway Pundit reported yesterday that two illegal aliens have hired the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) to represent them in a case claiming they suffered damages when they were deported by the United States. So illegal aliens want to sue America for enforcing its laws. Right.

The article reports:

Two fathers who were forcibly separated from their young children by immigration officials have filed administrative claims against the United States to seek compensation for the lasting harm caused by the Trump administration’s family separation policy. The claims, on behalf of families who will continue to suffer damage to their mental, physical and emotional health for years to come, are the latest in a series filed by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) and Covington & Burling.

“Thousands of children and parents will live with intense trauma the rest of their lives as a result of this policy, which the administration knew would leave indelible scars on these families,” said Michelle Lapointe, senior supervising attorney at the SPLC. “The government must be held accountable for its actions and it must put a stop to this practice once and for all.”

The filings detail the cruelty of both the practice of family separation and the treatment of these families while in federal custody. As has been well-documented, the intent of the family separations was to deter future migrants by deliberately subjecting immigrants in custody to harsh conditions that would ensure their suffering. The dehumanization of these families and other migrants is evident in the accounts of their treatment while in government custody.

How much suffering did these children endure in their quest to enter America illegally? When you break the law, are you not subject to the consequences?

The article concludes:

These administrative claims are the first step toward holding the government accountable for the separations and the resulting serious trauma and suffering of the affected families. If the government fails to respond within six months or rejects the claims, the families can seek damages by filing lawsuits in federal court.

“The harm inflicted on these fathers, their children and their entire families can never be undone,” said Jay Carey, a partner at Covington & Burling. “But those responsible for their pain can and must be held accountable.  And a message must be sent to this Administration — which has acted in the name of the American people — that such cruelty will not be tolerated here or in any civilized society.”

So if you are doing something illegal and something negative happens, you can sue the people who were enforcing the law? How does that make sense?

More Corrections For Falsely Reporting Information

Posted on by

Yesterday The Daily Caller posted an article about another fake news story that created a false impression.

The article reports:

After initially reporting that new guidelines could potentially deny “birthright citizenship” to the children of American military members abroad, NBC followed up with a major correction.

Initial reports on the new policy from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services focused almost entirely on one line from the guidance, namely that the Department of Homeland Security “no longer considers children of U.S. government employees and U.S. armed forces members residing outside the United States as ‘residing in the United States’ for purposes of acquiring citizenship.”

After a more careful reading of the policy, however, NBC’s Ken Dilanian offered a correction noting that the policy would apply to children adopted by American military and government employees overseas.

Candidate Joe Biden lost no time in trying to benefit from the false report. Below is his tweet:

It would have been nice if he had checked the facts before he spoke.

The Cost Of Congressional Inaction

Posted on by

America has needed a reasonable approach to immigration for years. Congress has chosen not to meet this need. So what is the cost of their inaction? Today’s Washington Examiner has some of the numbers.

The Washington Examiner reports:

Federal arrests of noncitizens have jumped over 200% in the last 20 years and now account for 64% of those arrested, according to the Justice Department.

The Bureau of Justice Statistics said that federal arrests of non-Americans rose 234% from 1998-2018. For U.S. citizens, the percentage rose just 10% over those 20 years.

The newly released statistics feed the Trump administration’s narrative that an increase in immigration, especially illegal immigration, has fed a spike in crime.

The article concludes:

Also over that period, illegal immigration has surged off and on and the bureau said that immigration crimes account for the bulk of arrests. In the past, Department of Homeland Security authorities have accounted for a majority of the arrests.

“20 years, 95% of the increase in federal arrests was due to immigration crimes. From 1998 to 2018, federal immigration arrests increased 5-fold (from 20,942 to 108,667), rising more than 50,000 in one year from 2017 to 2018,” said the Justice Department.

Vaughan, the director of policy studies for the Center for Immigration Studies, said that the statistics and types of crimes disprove claims by pro-immigration advocates that illegal immigrants aren’t involved in crimes.

“Opponents of immigration enforcement are obsessed with trying to establish that illegal aliens and legal immigrants commit fewer crimes than Americans, and so, as their narrative goes, local law enforcement agencies should not cooperate with ICE and should adopt sanctuary policies. This is first of all not true, but is off-point and a dangerous conclusion. What these numbers show is that there are certain types of crime that are disproportionately associated with illegal aliens: drug trafficking, certain gang crimes, and identity theft and document fraud,” she told Secrets.

I can’t even imagine how much this is costing our federal government. It would seem that with budget deficits as far as the eye can see, Congress might be willing to look at fixing the immigration problem as one positive step toward reducing government spending, Nope–the political issue is worth more than the solution. Also, is Congress willing to take responsibility for the Americans who have been harmed by illegal immigration?

A Common Sense Approach To Saving Taxpayer Money

Posted on by

Welfare was meant to be a safety net–not a career choice. Unfortunately we have lost the war on poverty started by President Lyndon Johnson in the 1960’s. According to the social work degree center website, in the 1960’s, 22 percent of Americans lived below the poverty line. In 2014, 14.8 percent of Americans lived below the poverty line. In January 2016, The Daily Signal reported:

First, the War on Poverty has failed to achieve Johnson’s goal: to “strike at the causes, not just the consequences of poverty.” Since he declared “unconditional war,” poverty has thumbed its nose at its would-be conquerors.

The official poverty rate has hovered between ten and fifteen percent for 50 years. But that is only a part of the story. Since the 1960s, the institutions that contribute to self-sufficiency—namely, marriage and work—have declined. Today, more than 40 percent of children are born outside marriage; in 1964, only 7 percent were.

…Robert Rector, senior research fellow in domestic policy studies at the Heritage Foundation, writes that “taxpayers have spent $22 trillion on Johnson’s war. Adjusted for inflation, that’s three times the cost of all military wars since the American Revolution.” It’s time to change course. We need a new strategy against poverty.

The changes in our culture are part of the problem, but there is another increasing problem–people who come to this country to take advantage of our generous welfare system.

Breitbart posted an article today stating:

President Trump is set to save American taxpayers billions of dollars as his administration announces a new rule on Monday that will essentially ban welfare-dependent legal immigrants from permanently resettling in the United States.

A new regulation set to be published by the Trump administration will ensure that legal immigrants would be less likely to secure a permanent residency in the U.S. if they have used any forms of welfare in the past, including using subsidized healthcare services, food stamps, and public housing.

Below is a chart of current welfare expenditures:

I have no problem with having a safety net, but it seems that our priorities are out of order. The first group of people that we should be helping are our veterans. Too many of them come home and need help to get on their feet when they separate from the military. I would like to see that as our first priority in welfare spending.

The article at Breitbart concludes:

Currently, there is an estimated record high of 44.5 million foreign-born residents living in the U.S. This is nearly quadruple the immigrant population in 2000. The vast majority of those arriving in the country every year are low-skilled legal immigrants who compete against working and middle-class Americans for jobs.

If we don’t get a handle on immigration, we are going to bankrupt America.

This Is How Sleight Of Hand Works

Posted on by

We have all heard that the border crisis is continuing because Congress and President Trump are not capable of working together to solve any problems. We have also heard that Republicans and Democrats are not capable of working together. Well, while the media was hyping Russia, Russia, Russia, those in Congress did pass a bill relating to immigration. It is bill that will hurt America’s high-skilled workers. The Democrats and the Chamber-of-Commerce Republicans (aka swamp dwellers) worked together to suspend the rules and pass the bill. Isn’t that special?

The Congressional website has the details (there is no direct link because the links expire):

H.R.1044 – Fairness for High-Skilled Immigrants Act of 2019

Passed House (07/10/2019)

Fairness for High-Skilled Immigrants Act of 2019

This bill increases the per-country cap on family-based immigrant visas from 7% of the total number of such visas available that year to 15%, and eliminates the 7% cap for employment-based immigrant visas. It also removes an offset that reduced the number of visas for individuals from China.

The bill also establishes transition rules for employment-based visas from FY2020-FY2022, by reserving a percentage of EB-2 (workers with advanced degrees or exceptional ability), EB-3 (skilled and other workers), and EB-5 (investors) visas for individuals not from the two countries with the largest number of recipients of such visas. Of the unreserved visas, not more than 85% shall be allotted to immigrants from any single country.

This is the timeline on the bill:

Date Chamber All Actions
07/11/2019 Senate Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
07/10/2019-4:58pm House Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
07/10/2019-4:58pm House On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 365 – 65 (Roll no. 437). (text: CR H5323-5324)
07/10/2019-4:48pm House Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H5336)
07/10/2019-3:24pm House At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
07/10/2019-2:51pm House DEBATE – The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 1044.
07/10/2019-2:51pm House Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H5323-5328)
07/10/2019-2:51pm House Ms. Lofgren moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
06/18/2019 House Motion to place bill on Consensus Calendar filed by Ms. Lofgren.
03/22/2019 House Referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration and Citizenship.
Action By: Committee on the Judiciary
02/07/2019 House Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
02/07/2019 House Introduced in House

This is the vote:

Understand that the Chamber of Commerce supports many Republican candidates. Their members support lower wages because it keeps corporate expenses down. The Democrats like the bill because it increases chain migration and theoretically provides future Democrat voters. Republicans and Democrats can agree when it is to their benefit. Unfortunately this agreement works against working Americans.

All t his was going on while the media was screaming “Russia, Russia, Russia.”