Copy
A CIS Weekly update on immigration policy related
opinions from the United States and around the world.

Immigration Opinions, 5/20/16


Support the Center for Immigration Studies by donating on line here: http://cis.org/donate
 
1. "Natural Conservatives!," Mark Krikorian
2. "Temporary Protected Status Means Never Having to Go Home," Mark Krikorian
3. "Common Sense Prevails at the Supreme Court in at Least One Deportation Case," Dan Cadman
4. "Using Expatriating Acts Against Terrorists to Safeguard the Homeland," Dan Cadman
5. " 'Make America Mexico Again'," Dan Cadman
6. "EB-5 Funds Created Jobs, but Workers Were Not Paid," David North
7. "This Is Getting Monotonous – Third Indian-on-Indian H-1B Scandal in 12 Days," David North
8. " 'Schrodinger's Immigrant' is No Paradox: Welfare and Work Go Together in Today's America," Jason Richwine
9. "Univision Has a Go-To Guy for Outrage Against Deportation," Jerry Kammer
10. "F.H. Buckley: Canada Is a More Successful Melting Pot than the U.S.," Jerry Kammer
11. "U.S.-bound Illegal Migration Through Costa Rica: Cubans and More," Kausha Luna
12. "Mexico Gets a Better Deal than the United States on Cuban Deportations," Kausha Luna
13. "Federal Judge Issues ‘Extraordinary’ Order Sanctioning the DOJ for Misconduct in Executive Amnesty Litigation," David French
14. "Judge Orders Ethics Classes For 'Deceptive' DOJ Attorneys," Joel Gehrke
15. "Administration's Plea to SCOTUS Is Wrong: Congress Has Repeatedly Limited Executive Discretion in Immigration Policy," Dan Stein
16. "Supreme Court Ruling Makes it Easier to Deport Criminal Immigrants," Chris Pandolfo
17. " 'Outrageous': DOJ on Hotseat Over Sanctuary Cities," Leo Hohmann
18. "Europe's Failed 'Open Door' Policies Must Not Be Repeated in America," Rep. Brian Babin
19. "Five Elements of a Rational Immigration Policy," Tim Dunkin
20. "Vermont’s $350 Million EB-5 Visa Fraud—Yet Another Reason To SHUT IMMIGRATION DOWN!," John Derbyshire
21. "Time: Here Comes Donald Trump’s Pivot on Immigration," Ed Morrissey
22. "Treason Bar Pushes To Expand Executive Amnesty Even Further," Federale
23. "Trump Says ‘Sanctuary Cities’ Should Lose Funding," David Workman
24. "Middle Class Suffers Amid High Immigration," Chris Chmielenski
25. "CHUTZPAH! Shikha Dalmia Wants NATIONAL REVIEW to Fire Krikorian Because He’s Pro-Abortion. He Isn’t (But She Is)," Washington Watcher
26. "National Review is Getting One Thing Badly Wrong on Immigration," Neil Stevens
27. "Why Do Pro-Life Conservatives Support Anti-Immigrant Groups Pushing Population Control?," Shikha Dalmia
28. "Why Governors Need an Immigration Plan," Tom Nassif
29. "How America Disrupts Its Immigrant Entrepreneurs," Karis Hustad
30. "What Would It Take for Donald Trump to Deport 11 Million and Build a Wall?," Julia Preston
31. "Obama’s Anti-Immigration Legacy Grows," Ruben Navarrette Jr.
32. "Immigration Raids Won't Fix Broken System," Raul A. Reyes
33. "How the GOP’s Rhetoric on Immigration Created a Demagogue," Amanda Sakuma
34. "When Immigration Status is Used as a Weapon for Domestic Abuse," Sasha von Oldershausen
35. U.K.: "Brexit and Immigration — the Vital Questions," The Financial Times
36. U.K.: "Brexit Can Only Be Good for the United Kingdom," Justin O. Smith
37. U.K.: "The BBC's Focus on Immigration Was a Whole Day of Anti-Brexit Propaganda," Toby Young
38. U.K.: "The Government's Lies on Immigration Will Push More People Towards Brexit," Carole Malone


1.
Natural Conservatives!
By Mark Krikorian
The Corner at National Review Online, May 17, 2016
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/435471/gop-needs-less-immigration-plus-more-outreach?target=author&tid=982

I’m not sure what specifically Kevin was referring to when he wrote in his piece yesterday on the Texas GOP convention that “our friends at the Center for Immigration Studies just last week published some unfortunately sneering remarks about Hispanics being ‘natural conservatives’” – but since “natural conservatives!” is part of my snark repertoire on Twitter (follow me!), I plead guilty.

But I think Kevin misunderstood. The sneering isn’t directed at Hispanics, or immigrants, or Hispanic immigrants. Rather, the object of my mockery is the Republican Brain Trust, the kind of people who, as Kevin noted, send Florida Cubans every two years to do outreach to Texas Mexicans. They actually imagine that immigrants are, as the saying goes, “natural conservatives” who just need to be given a little push to get them to support capital gains tax cuts and Social Security privatization.

As even the most cursory examination of the data shows, though, immigrant communities in general, and those of Latin origin in particular, vote heavily Democrat because the Democrat party is more in line with their own views. As I spelled out in some detail last year, drawing on Eagle Forum’s well-nigh encyclopaedic collection of survey data, immigrants are disproportionately likely to be big-government, pro-gun control, pro-affirmative action, environmentalist liberals. This isn’t a moral critique, but it is a fact. They are split on social issues like abortion similarly to the native-born – with Hispanic immigrants somewhat more pro-life and Asians slightly more pro-choice – but they don’t generally vote on such issues in any case.

If immigrants were really hungering for conservative policies, what explains the politics of San Francisco and New York, two of the most immigrant-heavy cities in the country?

In the face of these facts, the GOP Brain Trust’s response is to combine inept and patronizing outreach (Cubans selling to Mexicans) with promotion of amnesty, loose enforcement, and huge increases in future legal immigration. This is akin to the proverbial shopkeeper who loses money on each sale but seeks to make it up in volume. As the Eagle Forum report noted:

But Republicans can never turn liberal-leaning immigrants and their adult children into supporters of limited government faster than the current high level of legal immigration (one million a year) is bringing in new liberal voters.

So what to do? Cut immigration and improve outreach. The first is actually the easier task. As I laid out here a while back, we need to put in place specific enforcement systems, then (and only then) follow with a grand bargain of a quick, rip-off-the-band-aid amnesty in exchange for deep cuts in future legal immigration. The message to immigrants would be that you get to stay, but your brother-in-law and second cousin don’t get to come, legally or illegally. Not everyone’s going to jump for joy at the prospect, but fair-minded people will see the justice in it.

The outreach part is harder. It’s certainly not impossible – Greg Abbott put real effort into campaigning among Mexican Americans and got something like 45 percent of their vote, though, admittedly, he had a dopey and hapless opponent. But Abbott’s success was in getting Democrats to split their tickets, not to change allegiances. George W. Bush had similar success in his gubernatorial runs, but one of his ads suggests the problem: it said something to the effect of “Vote for Bush: Who cares if he’s a Republican?” Changing that, and getting more Mexican Americans to come to party conventions like the one Kevin reported on, is a generations-long effort.

Of course, you should start by not insulting people, a la Trump. But even if he underwent a personality transplant tomorrow, the basic problem would remain – a deeply ingrained immigrant preference for Democratic policies – and the solution is the same – reduce the number of new arrivals while doing missionary work among those who’ve already joined our society.

As for outreach, I offer again my idea of either the GOP or wealthy conservatives setting up American Opportunity Centers in immigrant communities, to teach English, help with tax returns, navigate municipal paperwork, etc. No politicking, no preaching, just helping newcomers assimilate – and thereby humanizing Republicans for immigrants, and vice versa. Something the Kochs might consider, if the reports are true that they’re going to spend less on national politics.

Return to Top


********
********

2.
Temporary Protected Status Means Never Having to Go Home
By Mark Krikorian
The Corner at National Review Online, May 16, 2016
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/435437/temporary-amnesty-never-ends?target=author&tid=982

Congress in 1990 created something called Temporary Protected Status in an attempt to hem in unilateral executive actions on immigration. The law created a framework for presidents to let illegal aliens from a country stay here for a limited period of time if there was a natural disaster or civil violence back home that made the country “unable, temporarily, to adequately handle the return of its nationals.” The point was to prevent presidential freelancing, though what had happened up to that time was microscopic compared to Obama’s outrages. (I wrote last month about the likely grant of TPS to Ecuadorian illegals in the wake of the earthquake there.)

Predictably, there’s nothing “temporary” about TPS. No one – not a single person – has ever been made to leave the United States because his TPS ran out. There are now maybe 300,000 or so illegal aliens with this status, which gives them work permits, Social Security numbers, driver’s licenses, and more. Obama’s lawless DACA and DAPA amnesties were modeled on TPS, though they target politically sympathetic categories of people rather than all aliens from a particular country, as TPS does.

The reason this “temporary” status is de facto permanent is that it is renewed every 12 or 18 months, forever. The Liberians who were the first group to benefit from the new formal status are still here a quarter-century later.

Today’s TPS renewal was for 60,000 Hondurans (and 2,000 Nicaraguans) who originally were permitted to stay because of Hurricane Mitch – in 1998. The Federal Register notice explains:

Although some of the destroyed infrastructure and housing has been rebuilt, Honduras continues to suffer the residual effects of the storm. The United Nations Development Programme has stated that Hurricane Mitch set Honduras back economically and socially by 20 years.

Twenty years? So come 2018 we can send them back? Of course not, because now there are new reasons to prolong the amnesty:

Since the last extension of Honduras’ TPS designation, Honduras has experienced a series of environmental disasters that have exacerbated the persisting disruptions caused by Hurricane Mitch and significantly compromised the Honduran state’s ability to adequately handle the return of its nationals. Additionally, climate fluctuations between heavy rainfall and prolonged drought continue to challenge recovery efforts.

Ah, “climate fluctuations” – amnesty if there’s too much rain, and amnesty if there’s too little. So we can repatriate only those illegal aliens whose home countries have just the right amount of rain every year?

Toward the end of 2014, Honduras suffered damage from severe rains, landslides, and flooding, as well as from the heavy winds associated with Tropical Storm Hanna. Partially due to the heavy rainfall, Honduras saw a dramatic increase in mosquito-borne diseases, particularly dengue and chikungunya, in 2014 and 2015.

Too many mosquitoes = amnesty?

The system of public hospitals is failing under this threat; in July 2015 the president of Honduras’ medical school warned that public hospitals in Honduras were barely able to provide medicine for common illnesses, let alone an epidemic of chikungunya. In rural areas, the health care system does not have the capacity to meet the needs of the local population.

Sounds like most places in the Third World.

A prolonged regional drought, which began in the summer of 2014, has heavily affected Honduras, leading to significant crop losses in 2014 and 2015, massive layoffs in the agricultural sector, negative impacts on hygiene, and an increase in food insecurity and health risks. The agricultural sector has also continued to suffer from the impacts of a regional coffee rust epidemic, resulting in lost livelihoods and weakening Honduras’ economy.

“Coffee rust”? Seriously?

Curiously, Iraq is not one of the countries whose illegals have received a TPS amnesty, despite the residual effects of the Mongol sack of Baghdad in 1258. And Tunisia’s never been the same since the Third Punic War in 146 BC.

Over the course of decades of lawful residence, “temporary” amnesty holders put down roots, have children, and so on, making it politically and even morally difficult to expel them – which is obviously the point of the constant renewals. One thing that might help is to require that any renewal after the initial grant be approved by both houses of Congress rather than the administration doing so on its own.

But in the end, no immigration system can have any integrity if the chief executive is dead-set on castrating it.

Return to Top


********
********

3.
Common Sense Prevails at the Supreme Court in at Least One Deportation Case
By Dan Cadman
CIS Immigration Blog, May 20, 2016
. . .
As I discussed in my original blog, interpreting the definition of aggravated felony used in immigration law to require an interstate commerce connection in state charges is the height of absurdity. The only reason it is invoked in the federal criminal arson charge is because that is the only way that the federal government can involve itself in crimes that are otherwise within the sovereign jurisdiction of the states. In fact, it seems to me that to place such an element in state criminal statutes would not only be unnecessary, but could quite conceivably be an impermissible and unconstitutional intrusion into the uniquely federal authority over interstate commerce.

I'm pleased to say that the Supreme Court upheld the findings of the immigration judge, the Board of Immigration Appeals, and the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in determining that the state charge of arson did, in fact, meet the test of aggravated felony, notwithstanding the lack of any element of interstate commerce.
. . .
http://cis.org/cadman/common-sense-prevails-supreme-court-least-one-deportation-case

Return to Top


********
********

4.
Using Expatriating Acts Against Terrorists to Safeguard the Homeland
By Dan Cadman
CIS Immigration Blog, May 18, 2016
. . .
In contrast, however, all citizens (natural born, derivative, or even naturalized) may be deemed to have expatriated if they engage in certain conduct, which can take place after naturalization in the case of individuals who acquire citizenship that way. But as a general proposition it is extremely difficult for any citizen to expatriate him- or herself, as the guiding Supreme Court case law, Afroyim v. Rusk, makes clear. Treasonous acts are one example of the kind of conduct that can result in expatriation. So, too, is voluntarily acquiring citizenship through naturalization in another country, since it is presumed that in formally assuming the obligations of fealty elsewhere one has surrendered fealty to the United States. Expatriation, when it occurs, conceivably leaves the expatriate stateless if the act(s) of expatriation did not involve taking on a new citizenship or nationality through naturalization somewhere else.
. . .
http://cis.org/cadman/using-expatriating-acts-against-terrorists-safeguard-homeland

Return to Top


********
********

5.
"Make America Mexico Again"
By Dan Cadman
CIS Immigration Blog, May 16, 2016

A number of observers have commented on the proliferation of Mexican flags at rallies in favor of amnesty and open borders, as well as at anti-Trump demonstrations. They've also noticed the "Make America Mexico Again" slogan showing up on signs, hats, and hashtags — supposedly as a humorous meme, but almost certainly one that exhibits more than a grain of serious intent behind it, even though such an intent would be ironic in the extreme.
. . .
But why would Mexico do something so counterintuitive as to encourage Mexican nationals to abandon their citizenship in order to pursue naturalization in the United States? The answer is because they don't take swearing an oath to the United States as the final word on the matter — Mexico still considers them to be dual nationals, and even encourages these newly minted Americans to continue voting in Mexican elections. This, despite the fact that the oath of citizenship requires that the newly naturalized swear to "absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen", and also despite the fact that voting in foreign elections is a potential basis for determining that a U.S. citizen has engaged in an act of expatriation.
. . .
http://cis.org/cadman/make-america-mexico-again

Return to Top


********
********

6.
EB-5 Funds Created Jobs, but Workers Were Not Paid
By David North
CIS Immigration Blog, May 17, 2016
. . .
Florida Organic Aquaculture, a for-profit enterprise, is a 22-acre shrimp farm in Fellsmere, Fla., and is reported by one news account to be a $16 million project that involved an unstated, but apparently substantial, amount of EB-5 investments.

It is only because of the crusading TV news team at WPBF, the ABC affiliate in Palm Beach, that the workers got any money at all, a partial payment for their work on the shrimp farm, according to the station's report.

Florida Organic Aquaculture's excuse for not paying the workers sounds a little like a "the dog ate my homework" response. Its CEO, Cliff Morris, told the station that an unnamed "foreign investor in the Middle East had tried to wire transfer a large sum, but that the investor's country blocked the transfer."

That suggests that the unnamed Middle Eastern country has really, really tight rules on its banks.
. . .
http://cis.org/north/suppose-eb-5-funds-provided-jobs-workers-were-not-paid

Return to Top


********
********

7.
This Is Getting Monotonous – Third Indian-on-Indian H-1B Scandal in 12 Days
By David North
CIS Immigration Blog, May 16, 2016
. . .
This time the corrupt employer, Ramesh Basa, has pled out and has agreed that the feds can seize six pieces of his real estate valued at half a million dollars as part of the deal. The agreement also included a joint recommendation by attorneys on both sides of the case for a one-year jail term for Basa.

This time, a slightly different technique was used to obtain H-1B workers for non-existent jobs (with the workers rented out later to other employers). Instead of creating phony little corporations as the alleged employers, as in the other two cases, Basa's team forged the names of real managers of existing companies on the applications.
. . .
http://cis.org/north/getting-monotonous-third-indian-indian-h1-b-scandal-12-days

Return to Top


********
********

8.
"Schrodinger's Immigrant" is No Paradox: Welfare and Work Go Together in Today's America
By Jason Richwine
CIS Immigration Blog, May 17, 2016

Immigration skeptics need to get their stories straight, according to a misleading internet meme that has been going around the past couple of years. Immigrants either compete with natives for jobs, or they go on welfare. It can't be both, right? That's the point of the graphic below, which is a play on the famous Schrodinger's Cat paradox. "Too lazy to work" is presumably a reference to concerns about immigrants using welfare, which other iterations have made explicit.

Unfortunately, spreaders of the meme (who include open-borders Reason editor Nick Gillespie) apparently do not understand how welfare in the U.S. works. "Schrodinger's Immigrant" is no paradox because most welfare programs are available to low-income workers. This means immigrants can and do simultaneously consume welfare and compete with natives in the labor market. In my recent CIS backgrounder comparing immigrant and native welfare consumption, I included a discussion of that point:
. . .
http://cis.org/cis/schrodingers-immigrant-no-paradox-welfare-and-work-go-together-todays-america

Return to Top


********
********

9.
F.H. Buckley: Canada Is a More Successful Melting Pot than the U.S.
By Jerry Kammer
CIS Immigration Blog, May 17, 2016

Yesterday's post reported on the appearance last week of George Mason law professor F.H. Buckley on MSNBC's Morning Joe program. Today we have more thoughts from the professor, who holds both U.S. and Canadian citizenship and says Canada has a better system of legal immigration than the United States because Canada, he notes, prioritizes the selection of immigrants who have skills and educational achievement that will allow them to integrate into the country's cultural and economic life. The U.S. system for awarding green cards, meanwhile, is heavily weighted toward family unification, i.e., allowing migrants who are already here to bring over their relatives, without regard to skill.
. . .
http://cis.org/kammer/fh-buckley-canada-more-successful-melting-pot-us

Return to Top


********
********

10.
Univision Has a Go-To Guy for Outrage Against Deportation
By Jerry Kammer
CIS Immigration Blog, May 20, 2016
. . .
The deportation of Henry Sanchez is certainly an unfortunate situation for him and his parents. But it is an effort of the Obama administration to maintain some semblance of credibility in its management the border.

Cabrera regards the arrest of Sanchez with the same moral outrage that he directs at any effort to enforce the law. Speaking to Univision about the Sanchez case, he declared, "These actions [by ICE] are vengeful. And the only purpose we believe they have is to intimidate, terrorize, and silence our community."

Now Cabrera and Moveon.org are circulating a petition demanding that the Department of Homeland Security release Sanchez. The past success of immigration activists in frustrating immigration controls is part of the reason for the popularity of Donald Trump.
. . .
http://cis.org/kammer/univision-has-go-guy-outrage-against-deportation

Return to Top


********
********

11.
U.S.-bound Illegal Migration Through Costa Rica: Cubans and More
By Kausha Luna
CIS Immigration Blog, May 20, 2016

Last Thursday, the Institute of World Politics here in Washington hosted a talk by Costa Rica's ambassador to the United States, Roman Macaya. His comments on migration will be of interest to readers.

Ambassador Macaya began by identifying the migration flows through the region as an issue that can't be ignored – most recently, the increasing flow of Cuban nationals. According to Macaya, Costa Rica saw 2,500 Cubans go through its territory in 2013; the number increased to 5,200 in 2014, and to 22,000 in 2015. He noted that such an uptick in migration from a single country is a significant trend, particularly for a small country like Costa Rica, smaller than West Virginia and with a population of 4.8 million people.

The ambassador went on to describe the backlog of Cuban migrants in Costa Rica and Panama that resulted in a series of airlifts to the U.S.-Mexico border.
. . .
http://cis.org/luna/us-bound-illegal-migration-through-costa-rica-cubans-and-more

Return to Top


********
********

12.
Mexico Gets a Better Deal than the United States on Cuban Deportations
By Kausha Luna
CIS Immigration Blog, May 18, 2016
. . .
Mexican officials have explained that in most cases the Cuban authorities do not recognize their potential countrymen, or it takes too much time. Under Mexico's immigration law, Mexican authorities can only hold the Cuban aliens for 15 days, while they wait for Cuba to recognize their national.

However, this is a non-issue for Mexico and Cuba, as they know that their neighbor to the north will welcome the islanders with open arms. Ultimately, the United States' Cuban Adjustment Act and "wet foot, dry foot" policy serve as a relief to the renewed memorandum: Cuba can continue to not recognize its nationals, Mexico does not have to pay the costs of deportation (as mandated by the memorandum) or extend the detention periods, and the United States will continue to take in the Cuban illegal aliens.
. . .
http://cis.org/luna/mexico-gets-better-deal-united-states-cuban-deportations

Return to Top


********
********

13.
Federal Judge Issues ‘Extraordinary’ Order Sanctioning the DOJ for Misconduct in Executive Amnesty Litigation
By David French
The Corner at National Review Online, May 19, 2016
. . .
In response, the court ordered the DOJ to provide lists of each affected illegal alien in each of the plaintiff states, required each DOJ attorney who practices in each of the plaintiff states to take additional legal ethics courses for a period of five years, and ordered the Attorney General to produce a comprehensive plan for ensuring that similar misconduct will not occur in the future. The court did not have the power to disbar the individual lawyers who made the misrepresentations, but it did revoke their permission to appear in the case.

The DOJ’s conduct is an example of lies compounding lawlessness. The Obama administration circumvented Congress by attempting mass-scale executive amnesty via memorandum, then its lawyers attempted to circumvent judicial accountability by lying to a federal judge. And through it all, the administration and its defenders are unashamed — because, after all, when it comes to matters of social justice, the ends justify the means.
. . .
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/435630/federal-judge-issues-extraordinary-order-sanctioning-doj-misconduct-executive-amnesty

Return to Top


********
********

14.
Judge Orders Ethics Classes For 'Deceptive' DOJ Attorneys
By Joel Gehrke
Washington Examiner, May 19, 2016

A federal judge has ordered annual ethics classes for Justice Department attorneys as a punishment for being "intentionally deceptive" during litigation over President Obama's executive immigration orders.

"Such conduct is certainly not worthy of any department whose name includes the word 'Justice,'" U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen wrote in a withering order released Thursday.

Justice Department attorneys misled the court about when the Department of Homeland Security would begin implementing President Obama's executive order granting "deferred action" to illegal immigrants whose children are citizens. In doing so, they tricked the 26 states who filed a lawsuit into "foregoing a request for a temporary restraining order," according to the judge.
. . .
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/judge-orders-ethics-classes-for-deceptive-justice-dept.-attorneys/article/2591815

Return to Top


********
********

15.
Administration's Plea to SCOTUS Is Wrong: Congress Has Repeatedly Limited Executive Discretion in Immigration Policy
By Dan Stein
Townhall.com, May 19, 2016
. . .
Shortly before President Obama announced DAPA and DACA+ in November 2014, the Department of Justice (DOJ) issued a memorandum asserting that the Executive Branch has broad prosecutorial discretion when it comes to immigration enforcement. In the memorandum, Deputy Attorney General Karl R. Thompson wrote, "Congress has long been aware of the practice of granting deferred action, including in its categorical variety ... and it has never acted to disapprove or limit the practice."

That key government claim, which also serves as the basis of the administration's appeal, is factually wrong. Over the past 60 years, Congress acted repeatedly to restrain, limit, or roll back the extra-statutory authority of the president and the executive branch to categorically grant relief from the nation's laws. Every congressional legislative act that addressed the question of agency prosecutorial discretion since 1952 has either rolled back or prohibited the exercise of discretion.
. . .
http://townhall.com/columnists/danstein/2016/05/19/administrations-plea-to-scotus-is-wrong-congress-has-repeatedly-limited-executive-discretion-in-immigration-policy-n2165503

Return to Top


********
********

16.
Supreme Court Ruling Makes it Easier to Deport Criminal Immigrants
By Chris Pandolfo
Conservative Review, May 20, 2016

A ruling made Thursday by the Supreme Court has made it easier for the government to deport immigrants who have committed crimes under state laws, reports the Wall Street Journal.
. . .
Justice Elena Kagan, writing for the majority, affirmed that “The whole point [of the deportation provision] is to make clear that a listed offense should lead to swift removal, no matter whether it violates federal, state or foreign law.”
. . .
https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2016/05/supreme-court-makes-it-easier-to-deport-criminal-immigrants#sthash.KBv3L7cG.dpuf

Return to Top


********
********

17.
'Outrageous': DOJ on Hotseat Over Sanctuary Cities
By Leo Hohmann
WND.com, May 19, 2016

As WND first reported, it was revealed during an April 21 State House hearing that the U.S. DOJ vetted and “enthusiastically” approved a new immigration policy for the New Orleans Police Department. That new policy, inserted into the court-approved consent decree, required officers not to question suspects about their immigration status.

In the latest move, Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., chair of the House Judiciary Committee, and Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., chair of the House subcommittee on immigration and border security, have written Lynch, upping the pressure on her to respond to questions and calling for a full investigation.

It is “outrageous that DOJ would seek a consent decree to actually inhibit the ability of the federal government to enforce federal law,” the two congressmen wrote to Lynch in the letter dated May 18.

“By hindering the ability of ICE to apprehend criminal aliens, DOJ consciously disregards the safety and security of the American public by enabling the release of these criminals back into our communities to commit more crimes,” the letter continues. “It also places ICE agents and officers at greater risk when they are forced to arrest these criminal aliens who are no longer in a secure jail facility, but in public places where they can more readily escape or access a weapon.”
. . .
http://www.wnd.com/2016/05/outrageous-doj-on-hotseat-over-sanctuary-cities/

Return to Top


********
********

18.
Europe's Failed 'Open Door' Policies Must Not Be Repeated in America
By Rep. Brian Babin
Washington Examiner, May 19, 2016

President Obama's own Department of Homeland Security, director of the Federal Bureau of Investigations and director of national intelligence have said that they cannot properly vet or screen those posing as "Syrian refugees." Common sense dictates that if we cannot guarantee there is no connection to terrorism, then we should not invite them into the United States. Not only is this dangerous — it's insane, yet the Obama administration is more determined than ever to invite such evil into our country.

Simply put, the American people do not want the turmoil and violence of the Middle East brought into the United States. A growing number of Americans and political figures — including Donald Trump — see what has taken place in Europe, and around the world, and they don't want to see it happen in the United States.
. . .
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/europes-failed-open-door-policies-must-not-be-repeated-in-america/article/2591714

Return to Top


********
********

19.
Five Elements of a Rational Immigration Policy
By Tim Dunkin
Canada Free Press, May 19, 2016
. . .
IV. Assimilation must be mandatory

Fourth, assimilation must be mandatory. Any sane immigration policy must recognize that there is no such thing as “magic soil.” Mere geographical location does not impart a new outlook on life. If someone is going to become an American, then they must become an American, not a “technically” American who is really still a foreigner in heart and spirit. It is common to speak of “ugly Americans” who go overseas and then expect everyone in foreign countries to cater and adapt to them. We should end the phenomenon of “ugly Mexicans” and “ugly Vietnamese” and “ugly Nigerians” who immigrate here and then form ethnic conclaves, expecting that the signs and the ballots will be printed in their native languages, that Americans will bend over backwards to avoid offending any of their cultural sensitivities, and all the rest. Diversity destroys a nation, and we must not allow it among the immigrants we allow to come in. Both those yet to come under such a policy, as well as those already here, must be strongly encouraged to assimilate, learn English, adopt our mores, and so forth. Failure to do so according to quantifiable measures should result in termination of any visas and green cards. There must be a conscious deracination of any foreign elements and their absorption into the social body of America.
. . .
V. Zero tolerance policy towards illegal immigration

Fifth – and this really should go without saying – we must adopt a zero tolerance policy towards illegal immigration. Build the wall. Enforce the laws against hiring illegals. Deport illegals as they come in contact with law enforcement. Encourage self-deportation. Strictly oversee welfare programs to ensure that nobody here illegally is receiving a dime. Doing these will not be nearly as expensive as the long-term costs of not doing them. One commonly expressed policy idea that should not be coupled with this is that of permanently excluding all who have ever come here illegally. Such a policy would actually serve to retard the repatriation of illegal immigrants as it would remove from them the hope of being able to return legally some day, and hence make them more determined to evade the enforcement of the laws. In the spirit of the points above, if there are people here illegally but who genuinely would make serious positive contributions to our society, my belief is that we should allow them to do so – as they obey our laws and come here in the manner that we have prescribed.

Really, while I am sure that these suggestions would be met with howls of indignation in many circles, I don’t really see them as anything other than a simple restatement of common sense. Of course a well-reasoned immigration policy will look to our needs first, will encourage national unity, will reject the divisiveness of “diversity,” and will act to protect the interests of the “Average Joe” Americans who constitute this nation. Whether all, or even any, of these goals would be met post-Trumpening is anyone’s guess. However, these ought to be put out there into the marketplace of ideas so that they can serve to leaven the discussion on immigration with a little common sense.
. . .
http://canadafreepress.com/article/five-elements-of-a-rational-immigration-policy

Return to Top


********
********

20.
Vermont’s $350 Million EB-5 Visa Fraud—Yet Another Reason To SHUT IMMIGRATION DOWN!
By John Derbyshire
VDare.com, May 17, 2016
. . .
Isn’t the EB-5 visa program carefully supervised by the Customs and Immigration Service? Ha!

This is your nation’s immigration system at work, listeners: an ATM for crooks and con artists, a badge of political respectability for grandstanding congressreptiles gushing about our “nation of immigrants” before heading off to another lobster dinner with the likes of Quiros and Stenger, a disaster for us, the American people.

Shut it down, shut the whole thing down. We have all the people we need, there’s no reason for any further settlement. Spouses and dependent children of U.S. citizens; a few individuals of exceptional ability or accomplishment; a few foreigners who’ve put their lives on the line to help the U.S.A.; that’s it, that’s all we should take, a few thousand immigrants a year.
. . .
http://www.vdare.com/articles/vermonts-350-million-eb-5-visa-fraud-yet-another-reason-to-shut-immigration-down

Return to Top


********
********

21.
Time: Here Comes Donald Trump’s Pivot on Immigration
By Ed Morrissey
HotAir.com, May 20, 2016
. . .
For comparison purposes, Trump’s performance in this poll falls about the same as Mitt Romney’s in 2012. Romney lost the Hispanic vote 71/27, a 44-point gap, and lost among Latinas 76/23. Hispanics made up 10% of the electorate in 2012, up slightly from 8% in 2004, when George W. Bush won narrowly over John Kerry while getting 44% of the Hispanic vote.

Does that doom Trump in a general election? It’s certainly not good news if those numbers don’t improve for the Republican nominee. That explains why Trump has lately shifted his tone on immigration while meeting with Hispanics, starting almost immediately after clinching the nomination. Time Magazine’s Elizabeth Dias reports today on the change in approach Trump took when meeting with a leading Hispanic evangelical leader that had been one of Ted Cruz’ advisers during the campaign:
. . .
http://hotair.com/archives/2016/05/20/time-here-comes-donald-trumps-pivot-on-immigration/?utm_source=hotiairwidget_0&utm_medium=story&utm_campaign=hotiairwidget

Return to Top


********
********

22.
Treason Bar Pushes to Expand Executive Amnesty Even Further
By Federale
VDare.com, May 17, 2016

The Treason Bar is worried, as the Supreme Court seems sharply divided on whether to overturn the Fifth Circuit’s Court of Appeals decision that halted President Obama’s unilateral amnesty [Obama Immigration Plan Seems to Divide Supreme Court, by Adam Liptak and Michael Shear, New York Times, April 18, 2016]. As it stands, law enforcement officials could also step forward and file a suit to challenge Obama’s actions and attack the unilateral amnesty from another direction. But not to be deterred, one of the lawyers who anticipated the Administrative Amnesty at an immigration law blog before it happened is now calling for other unilateral actions—designed to allow even more foreigners to take what few American jobs remain.
. . .
http://www.vdare.com/articles/treason-bar-pushes-to-expand-executive-amnesty-even-further

Return to Top


********
********

23.
Trump Says ‘Sanctuary Cities’ Should Lose Funding
By David Workman
ConservativeFiringLine.com, May 18, 2016

In an on-air interview with KVI-AM’s morning host John Carlson in Seattle on Wednesday, presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump blasted the idea of so-called “sanctuary cities,” and said that as president, he would withhold funding from those cities.

He called such cities “a haven for criminals.”

“We have to have law and order in our country,” Trump said. “We have no law and order. When you look at the people who are pouring in and the borders are so porous.
. . .
http://conservativefiringline.com/trump-says-sanctuary-cities-should-lose-funding/#

Return to Top


********
********

24.
Middle Class Suffers Amid High Immigration
By Chris Chmielenski
NumbersUSA.com, May 16, 2016
The American middle class shrunk in 90% of 229 metros across the nation between 2000 and 2014, according to a report released this week by the Pew Research Center. In half of the metros, more Americans moved from the middle-income tier to the lower-income tier than from the middle-income tier to the upper-income tier.

Eleven of the top 32 metros that experienced a net decline across the income tiers, fall in the Piedmont region between Raleigh, N.C. and Atlanta, Ga. This region has experienced rapid population growth fueled by high immigration levels over the same period of time.
. . .
Some in Congress are pushing for even more foreign workers. Most of those pushing for increases represent the areas that are suffering the worst.

Nine Members of Congress sent a letter last week to the House Appropriations Homeland Security Subcommittee pushing for a provision to the FY17 DHS spending bill that could potentially quadruple the number of H-2B visas issued. The H-2B visa program allows foreign workers to fill temporary or seasonal jobs when employers claim that they can't find an American worker to fill the job. The annual cap is 66,000, but Congress added a provision to last year's omnibus spending bill that exempts any foreign worker who has had an H-2B visa over the last three years from the annual cap. That provision expires on Sept. 30 unless it's renewed.
. . .
https://www.numbersusa.com/blog/middle-class-suffers-amid-high-immigration

Return to Top


********
********

25.
CHUTZPAH! Shikha Dalmia Wants NATIONAL REVIEW to Fire Krikorian Because He’s Pro-Abortion. He Isn’t (But She Is)
By Washington Watcher
VDare.com, May 19, 2016

It’s no secret that VDARE is unimpressed with National Review and is sometimes compelled to offer constructive criticism to the Center for Immigration Studies for its triangulating. Yet, in a sign of how bad Conservatism Inc., has now become, even National Review has found itself under attack from cuckservatives and left-libertarians because it publishes CIS’s executive director Mark Krikorian.
. . .
To the extent there is anything new, it was Dalmia’s condemnation of National Review for its relationship with Krikorian—he has served as a sort of Immigration Beard there since shortly after William F. Buckley purged the magazine of immigration patriots in 1998. She expresses shock and outrage that “National Review, perhaps the country’s leading journal for intellectual conservatives, and a magazine with strong pro-life leanings, has lent its name and platform to the leader of an organization that clearly favors population control.”
. . .
When John Fonte refuted this smear last time around, he pointed out that Mark Krikorian, Jessica Vaughn, and Steve Camarota–definitely the most visible and prolific writers at CIS—were all, as a matter of fact, pro-life [Smearing the Center for Immigration Studies, February 20, 2013].

Dalmia does not respond to this, but simply points to isolated mentions of abortion in CIS’s many publications:
. . .
Dalmia’s chutzpah here is astounding. I reported in 2013 that Marco Rubio and his ally Mario H. Lopez of the Human Life Review were promoting the same pro-life attacks on immigration patriots–this time under the auspices of the National Immigration Reform, which was funded by pro-abortion Ford Foundation and George Soros’ Open Society Foundation. I thought that was the height of hypocrisy.

But Rubio and Lopez are at least pro-life themselves. Dalmia, in contrast, describes herself as an “atheist, and a supporter of abortion rights,” [Why is the Left Not Cheering For a Mom’s Right to Keep Her Meager Subsidies?, Reason, July 8, 2014] and has even inveighed against bans on late term abortions [How the Pro-Life Movement Endangers the Unborn, Reason, May 19, 2015].

Of course, Dalmia should be laughed off. But gullible and/or opportunistic Cuckservatives are endorsing her. Neil Stevens of Red State declared that National Review must “Dump Krikorian” to ensure that it maintains its hard earned respectability status. At the same time, he echoes Dalmia’s claims that he supports the “movement to secure the border, and restore fairness and law-and-order to our immigration policies.” His concern is that Krikorian is a “Trojan Horse” to the conservative cause. [
. . .
http://www.vdare.com/articles/chutzpah-shikha-dalmia-wants-national-review-to-fire-krikorian-because-hes-pro-abortion-he-isnt-but-she-is

Return to Top


********
********

26.
National Review is Getting One Thing Badly Wrong on Immigration
By Neil Stevens
RedState.com, May 17, 2016
. . .
I agree with Shikha Dalmia’s closing words: “However, if the conservative movement dilutes its other core commitments to make questionable alliances in order to push its anti-immigration agenda, it’ll only lose credibility over the long run. In the war on immigration, not all is fair.”

We must not diminish the movement to secure the border, and restore fairness and law-and-order to our immigration policies, by associating with terrible people. Guilt by association may not be fair, but it destroys political movements. As it stands, Donald Trump may be about to give us a full amnesty next year, if he loses badly enough. John Tanton and his minions like Mark Krikorian aren’t as well known for paling around with racists, but it’s starting to come out, and it will help the open borders side if we don’t purge them.

National Review: Dump Krikorian. He and his organization are a Trojan horse.
. . .
http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2016/05/17/national-review-getting-one-thing-badly-wrong-immigration/

Return to Top


********
********

27.
Why Do Pro-Life Conservatives Support Anti-Immigrant Groups Pushing Population Control?
By Shikha Dalmia
TheWeek.com, May 11, 2016

America's anti-immigration restrictionist movement has historically had one foot in the labor protectionist camp and another in the population control camp. Many pro-life conservatives count themselves among immigration restrictionists — which makes the anti-immigration movement's population control argument downright bizarre, given that population control and abortion politics have been a key flashpoint in conservatives' broader culture war with the left.

But even as the environmental left has been shunning the restrictionist movement, conservatives have been embracing it. Indeed, the right is the sole link to mainstream respectability for three of America's most influential restrictionist groups — FAIR (Federation for American Immigration Reform), CIS (Center for Immigration Studies), and NumbersUSA — all founded by John Tanton, an ophthalmologist who laments that Hitler gave eugenics a bad name.
. . .
http://theweek.com/articles/622838/why-prolife-conservatives-support-antiimmigrant-groups-pushing-population-control

Return to Top


********
********

28.
Why Governors Need an Immigration Plan
A ‘Governors’ Immigration Reform Bill’ could serve as the template for a new effort in Washington.
By Tom Nassif
The Wall Street Journal, May 19, 2016
. . .
The majority of America’s governors support some version of comprehensive immigration reform. They are elected statewide and have broader support than most members of the House of Representatives. Governors have authority over many things that members of Congress care about in their home states, and thus they have special powers of persuasion. As chief executives, governors know how to get things done. They are problem-solvers who are usually pragmatic and comfortable working across the aisle.

Moreover, most governors across America are deeply engaged with the businesses and public services most affected by the immigration stalemate, including public education, public safety, technology, health care, manufacturing and agriculture.

America’s governors may be the ideal leaders to create a new dynamic that will push immigration reform forward.

What’s to stop a group of current and former governors, from both parties and from all regions, from assembling to take on immigration reform? With the help of think tanks and policy experts they trust, they could develop new proposals to solve the problems that partisan stalemate in Congress has caused in their states.
. . .
http://www.wsj.com/articles/why-governors-need-an-immigration-plan-1463699992

Return to Top


********
********

29.
How America Disrupts Its Immigrant Entrepreneurs
With immigration policy in flux, five foreign-born startup founders discuss their narrow road to entrepreneurship
By Karis Hustad
ChicagoInno.streetwise.co, May 16, 2016
. . .
Could a 'startup visa' be the answer?

Many entrepreneurs agree providing a 'startup visa,' which would give entrepreneurs temporary work authorization while they proved traction, is ideal. But policy along these lines has largely stalled.

One example is the Startup Act, which would allocate 75,000 three-year visas to foreign-born entrepreneurs. If founders meet certain investment and hiring benchmarks, they can apply for a permanent visa. The legislation would also add 50,000 visas for foreign-born students who graduate from U.S. universities with STEM degrees

Legislation was introduced to the Senate last January, and it’s currently in the Committee on Finance, where it has stalled as Republicans and Democrats differ over whether to reform laws piece-by-piece or a comprehensive overhaul.

In the meantime President Obama issued an executive action in 2014 that would grant parole--permission to remain in the US but not permanent residence--for startup founders that have raised significant capital or show promise in creating jobs. However, the action is not in effect and no regulations have been issued.

In the meantime, countries such as Chile, New Zealand, Australia, Ireland, India and Canada (among others) have programs to attract foreign founders.

As for an entrepreneur visa, there's the worry people would set up fraudulent companies and investment, given how the H-1B program has been so expertly gamed. But Matt Meltzer, an immigration lawyer that consults at the Chicago Innovation Exchange, said it's a small percentage.

"The overwhelming majority are using the visa classes in a way that is true to the way they work," he said. "Those people are not looking for a vacation in the United States. They're looking for opportunity."
. . .
http://chicagoinno.streetwise.co/2016/05/16/without-startup-visa-immigrant-entrepreneurs-try-h-1b-opt/

Return to Top


********
********

30.
What Would It Take for Donald Trump to Deport 11 Million and Build a Wall?
By Jessica Preston
New York Times, May 20, 2016

Big promises are to be expected from presidential candidates, but reality often intrudes. The elder George Bush broke the “no new taxes” pledge that helped lead to his election. And Barack Obama’s administration has yet to live up to his prediction that his nomination would go down in history as the moment “when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal.”

Donald J. Trump’s vow to restore what he says is America’s lost luster, while perhaps not as flowery, comes with campaign promises that are equally grandiose. But Mr. Trump, the presumptive Republican nominee, has typically provided scant details on how he might make good on his promises — and ambitious ideas, even the concrete kind, do not always add up.
. . .
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/20/us/politics/donald-trump-immigration.html?_r=2

Return to Top


********
********

31.
Obama’s Anti-Immigration Legacy Grows
By Ruben Navarrette Jr.
The San Antonio Express-News, May 19, 2016
. . .
Obama lives in the protectionist faction of the Democratic Party. In 2008, during a debate in Los Angeles, against primary opponent Hillary Clinton, the then-senator from Illinois began his answer to a question about immigration by expressing concern that employers might hire immigrants instead of Americans.

The president’s anti-immigrant credentials are well-established. He broke his promise to make immigration reform a top priority, deported nearly 3 million people, divided hundreds of thousands of families, dumped into foster care tens of thousands of U.S.-born children whose parents got deported, pushed back for three years against immigration reformers who asked that he use executive power to halt deportations, claimed that only criminals were being deported, and then tried to cover his tracks by blaming Republicans for the evil that his administration had done.

Now Obama is getting ready to deport a bunch of refugees from Central America, just a year after he made the case to the nation that we should take in refugees from Syria. Come to think of it. One wing in the library won’t be enough.
. . .
http://www.mysanantonio.com/opinion/commentary/article/Obama-s-anti-immigration-legacy-grows-7748756.php

Return to Top


********
********

32.
Immigration Raids Won't Fix Broken System
By Raul A. Reyes
CNN.com, May 16, 2016
. . .
That's the Obama administration's ominous message to Central American women and children who may be in the United States illegally. On Thursday, Reuters reported that the government soon plans to start a 30-day "surge" of immigration raids, to remove families that the administration says did not show up for their court appearances or who have defied orders to leave the country. These raids are meant to deter other Central Americans from making the dangerous journey north.

These raids — planned in response to the doubling of the number of Central American "family units" (women and children) apprehended at our southern border -- reflect a deeply misguided strategy for immigration enforcement. The Obama administration is making targets of women and children who should be protected, not punished. The raids against them will sow distrust and fear in all immigrant communities -- while doing absolutely nothing to help fix our broken immigration system.
. . .
True, the U.S. must protect its borders and enforce its immigration laws. However, the people targeted by these raids are not undocumented immigrants who came here to work or to conduct illegal business. The government's own data shows that the overwhelming majority of Central American detainees have a credible or reasonable fear of persecution at home, which means that they could make a case for asylum. Eighty-three U.S. deportees to Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador reportedly have already been murdered in their homelands.
. . .
http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/15/opinions/immigration-raids-are-wrong-raul-reyes/

Return to Top


********
********

33.
How the GOP’s Rhetoric on Immigration Created a Demagogue
By Amanda Sakuma
MSNBC.com, May 19, 2016
. . .
Trump fully committed to the shock-factor with his inflammatory remarks that Mexicans were “drug dealers and rapists.” But in reality, his comments were not far off from what Republicans had been saying all along.

“I’ll do anything short of shooting them,” Alabama Rep. Mo Brooks said on camera in 2011, referring to the lengths he would take to stop undocumented immigrants. Texas Rep. Louie Gohmert has been warning for years that al Qaeda cells have infiltrated the U.S.-Mexico border. His red-alarms build on the long-established rallying cries of retired Rep. Tom Tancredo, who was so convinced that illegal immigration would cause to a terror attack that he released a terrifying campaign ad to simulate the imminent violence brought by immigrants.

The most notorious of them all is Iowa Rep. Steve King, who serves as his own candid insult generator against immigrants. His most famous line suggested that at least half of young immigrants were drug mules who crossed the border of Mexico with “calves the size of cantaloupes.”

These inflammatory comments and fear-mongering tactics used to be confined to the fringe. While Republican elites would aim their immigration attacks on Obama, as not to alienate any Latino voters that they’re trying to convert into conservatives, there were always those far-right voices that appealed to the nativist sentimentality. But now it’s mainstream.
. . .
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/how-the-gops-rhetoric-immigration-created-demagogue

Return to Top


********
********

34.
When Immigration Status is Used as a Weapon for Domestic Abuse
By Sasha von Oldershausen
Fusion.net, May 16, 2016
. . .
According to Presidio Police Chief Marco Baeza, this type of abuse is not uncommon in the border region.

“One thing that I see all the time in cases where one of the spouses is undocumented, they’ll often get threatened by the abuser that they’ll get deported,” Baeza said. “Or the abuser will say, ‘If you call law enforcement, I’m going to call immigration and they’ll send you back.’”
. . .
http://fusion.net/story/302534/when-immigration-status-is-used-as-a-weapon-for-domestic-abuse/

Return to Top


********
********

35.
Brexit and Immigration — the Vital Questions
The Financial Times, May 18, 2016
. . .
What do the Brexiteers say?
The Leave campaign says it wants control over who comes — a flexible migration policy that does not necessarily crack down on EU migrants but treats EU and non-EU migrants equally.

Pro-Brexit politicians often talk of introducing an “Australian-style points system” to bring in the brightest and most talented migrants. But it is unclear how that might apply to those hoping to work in Britain as fruit pickers or hotel receptionists — the very people employers say are essential.

Oxford university’s Migration Observatory said this month that three-quarters of EU citizens working in the UK would not meet current visa requirements for non-EU overseas workers if Britain left the bloc.

However, such restrictions are likely to apply to new entrants rather to than EU migrants already in the EU, who legal experts say would probably retain their rights to live and work in the country.
. . .
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/e1f6c0ee-1c41-11e6-a7bc-ee846770ec15.html#axzz49EXJTfLg

Return to Top


********
********

36.
Brexit Can Only Be Good for the United Kingdom
By Justin O. Smith
American Thinker Blog, May 17, 2016

Over forty years ago, Britain last debated her relationship with Europe, and even then, elected officials on both the right and left, such as two of the most iconic political figures of that era, Enoch Powell and Tony Benn, campaigned against the U.K.'s membership in what was then the European Economic Community. They objected to Britain's elected government meekly surrendering Britain's national sovereignty to unelected foreign entities and the fundamental lack of democracy in the EU.

Lady Margaret Thatcher knew that it would be near impossible to effectively and efficiently impose one currency, one economy, and one national identity on many different countries (now 28) with such different languages, histories, customs, and cultures in general. Early on, the Iron Lady called the attempt to create a European super-state "the greatest folly of the modern era."

Britons, excited and optimistic, are moving forward to reclaim a more free, prosperous, ally-connected, and nationally secure Britain, through their own elected officials and their own choices and wisdom, breaking free of the heavy bureaucratic chains of the European Union. As they shout "Hail Britannia," they will vote to leave in June.
. . .
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/05/brexit_can_only_be_good_for_the_united_kingdom.html

Return to Top


********
********

37.
The BBC's Focus on Immigration Was a Whole Day of Anti-Brexit Propaganda
By Toby Young
The Telegraph (U.K.), May 16, 2016
. . .
Sadly, my newfound respect for the BBC was dealt a blow yesterday when the broadcaster devoted an entire day of live programming to migration. With the hashtag #WorldOnTheMove, the BBC covered the subject from a variety of angles, including a report from Vietnam by Sarah Montague on the Today programme, an extended interview on the World at One with Filippo Grandi, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, and a radio drama by the award-winning playwright James Graham entitled Where Shall I Go, What Shall I Do?

If you were looking for impartiality, you’d come to the wrong place. The entire day was like a 24-hour political broadcast for the Remain campaign.
. . .
“Many believe that refugees are people that come to rich countries to take advantage of a better way of living,” he told Martha Kearney, unable to contain his amusement at such a laughably inadequate hypothesis. “Refugees mostly flee because they are compelled to flee by terrible, unimaginable violence. If they had a choice, they wouldn’t leave, but they have no choice. That’s why we have such a strong not only legal, but also a moral obligation to give them asylum.”

That isn’t true. The number of displaced people in the world currently stands at 60 million, higher than it’s ever been, but both war and poverty have declined dramatically since World War II, a phenomenon painstakingly documented by the Harvard psychologist Steven Pinker.

The subtext of Grandi’s “terrible, unimaginable violence” remarks couldn’t have been clearer. Anyone in the UK who wants to restrict the flow of migrants into our country – that is, anyone thinking of voting Leave – is a knuckle-dragging barbarian.
. . .
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/16/the-bbcs-focus-on-immigration-was-a-whole-day-of-anti-brexit-pro/

Return to Top


********
********

38.
The Government's Lies on Immigration Will Push More People Towards Brexit
The Government claimed immigration figures were much smaller than they actually were - potentially harming the Remain campaign
By Carole Malone
The Mirror (U.K.), May 14, 2016
. . .
So, for years we’ve been sold a big fat lie on immigration. And those who suspected we were being lied to, those who dared ­question the numbers, were immediately smacked down as racists or Little Englanders.

But they weren’t racist at all.

They were – and still are – desperate, frightened people no one was listening to, people who were losing their jobs to cheap foreign labour, who couldn’t get their kids into the schools they wanted.

They’re people who, having waited years to get to the top of the housing list, were pushed back down again because the needs of families coming from Poland and Romania were deemed more urgent.

They’re people who no longer recognise their own towns and cities because of exploding migrant populations.
. . .
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/governments-lies-immigration-push-more-7967955

Return to Top



********







 

The Center for Immigration Studies is an independent, non-partisan, non-profit research organization founded in 1985. It is the nation's only think tank devoted exclusively to research and policy analysis of the economic, social, demographic, fiscal, and other impacts of immigration on the United States.