NYTimes to Elites: Blame Americans First for Causing Illegal Migration
Foreign migrants take American jobs illegally because the federal government will not let them take the jobs legally, according to a new article in the New York Times.
“The Reagan-era amnesty in 1986 caused only a temporary drop in the number of undocumented immigrants because it was not accompanied by a robust system for legally bringing in low-skilled workers,” said the January 27 news article by reporter Miriam Jordan.
The editor-approved headline was “The Reality Behind Biden’s Plan to Legalize 11 Million Immigrants,” referring to illegal migrants.
The New York Times‘ perspective on illegal migration matches George W. Bush’s “Any Willing Worker” strategy, said Mark Krikorian, director of the Center for Immigration Studies:
It is the business perspective that the level of immigration should be set by market conditions, that there are no limits. The desires of business and of the immigrants are the two things that determine how many immigrants come here, not the American people’s elected representatives.
The same claim was loudly made in 1990 when Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) and President George H. Bush doubled the inflow of legal immigrants and visa workers in the 1990 immigration expansion act.
Nonetheless, 5.5 million illegal migrants moved into the United States from 1900 to 2000, doubling the illegal population to seven million, according to a report by the Department of Homeland Security.
That illegal inflow happened even though Congress also created the blue-collar H-2A and H-2B visa worker programs in 1986 and allowed the J-1 program to quadruple during the 1990s.
The Bush/Kennedy 1990 act also allowed CEOs to push two generations of U.S. professionals out of skilled careers because it allowed the Fortune 500 CEOs to import a huge number of H-1B visa contract workers. That legal inflow still helps investors suppress competition by minimizing the number of innovative Americans and consolidating their control of the sector.
The New York Times report also downplays the civic and economic value of automating and mechanizing lower-skilled jobs, claiming that “Demographers say a shortage of blue-collar workers highlights the need for immigrants, in ever larger numbers, to perform low-skilled jobs.”
There is growing evidence that labor migration reduces pressure on investors to redirect their profits back into the productivity-boosting training, innovation, automation, and robotics that can keep lower-skilled Americans and America rich, stable, and more equal, amid growing worldwide competition.
“If the [pro-migration advocates] got their way, we would end up with the United Arab Emirates in North America,” where a wealthy elite dominates a population of imported, powerless, and replaceable workers, Krikorian said. He added:
The [advocates] just say, “Well, a rising tide raises all boats, and more immigrants mean there’s also more demand [for American workers] in the economy and so everybody wins.” There is no cost, there are no trade-offs, there are no losers, just a happy-clappy way of looking at the issue.
I think they believe [their own claims] because they don’t want to think beyond that. And [they think] people who put forth a different position are bad people and so [the different position] can’t be right because they’re bad people.
Jordan’s view is commonplace throughout the establishment — and in the White House following the election of President Joe Biden.
“President [Joe Biden] outlined his plan to reduce migration,” said a January 23 White House statement:
by … increasing [migrant] resettlement capacity and lawful alternative immigration pathways [in the United States], improving processing at the [U.S.] border to adjudicate [migrants’] requests for asylum, and reversing the previous administration’s draconian immigration policies.
“One of the things that I think is critical to remember,” said Roberta Jacobson, Biden’s newly hired coordinator for the southern border, in a June 2020 conversation with other migration advocates, is that:
The United States closed off almost every other avenue for migration from Central America, and indeed, from Mexico to the United States, which in some respects, not completely, forced people to seek asylum, right? There aren’t temporary worker programs other than agricultural and low skilled H-2A [programs], and those have struggled, frankly, to keep up with both demand and processing. And so people have sort of resorted to requesting asylum, both for legitimate reasons, but also because they don’t know of any other way to get to the United States.
For years, a wide variety of pollsters have shown deep and broad opposition to labor migration — or the hiring of temporary contract workers into the jobs sought by young U.S. graduates. The multiracial, cross-sex, non-racist, class-based, priority-driven, and solidarity-themed opposition to labor migration coexists with generally favorable personal feelings toward legal immigrants and toward immigration in theory.
Americans oppose the entry of caravan migrants by 2:1 — but liberals & wealthy support the inflow.
(Do wealthy Americans find it easier to hire grateful migrants for labor than to hire Americans w/ expectations of civic respect? Has this been studied?)https://t.co/kbFGlTmNWD
— Neil Munro (@NeilMunroDC) January 23, 2021
The deep public opposition is built on the widespread recognition that migration moves money from employees to employers, from families to investors, from young to old, from children to their parents, from homebuyers to real estate investors, and from the central states to the coastal states.
Migration allows investors and CEOs to skimp on labor-saving technology, sideline U.S. minorities, ignore disabled people, exploit stoop labor in the fields, shortchange labor in the cities, impose tight control and pay cuts on American professionals, corral technological innovation by minimizing the employment of innovative American graduates, undermine Americans’ labor rights, and redirect progressive journalists to cheerlead for Wall Street’s priorities and claims.
Jordan’s George W. Bush-like statement at the New York Times is echoed by editors at the investor-dominated Wall Street Journal.
Under a January 26 headline, “On Immigration, Compromise Beats Amnesty,” columnist Jason Riley called for investors to compromise with progressive groups:
… the amnesty debate is largely a side issue. Simply legalizing the status of these migrants—most of whom have been in the country for more than a decade—won’t solve the larger problem, which is the imbalance between the number of [worker] visas available and the number of foreigners who want them. After World War II, the federal government’s Bracero program extended work visas to Mexican migrants to address a U.S. labor shortage, and the rate of illegal immigration plummeted … The biggest failure of the 1986 amnesty under Ronald Reagan was that it did little to expand ways to come lawfully. Mr. Biden should avoid making the same mistake.
“The only answer to this [migrant pressure] quandary is to open more legal pathways,” WSJ columnist Mary Anatasia Gray wrote January 24.
The New York Times offers uncritical support for labor migration, but also it reports the spreading poverty in immigrant-dominated suburbs and cities.
On January 29, for example, the New York Times posted a detailed report showing the coronavirus’s spread through the migrant-heavy Los Angeles region:
County officials recently estimated that one in three of Los Angeles County’s roughly 10 million people have been infected with Covid-19 since the beginning of the pandemic. But even amid an uncontrolled outbreak, some Angelenos have faced higher risk than others. County data shows that Pacoima, a predominantly Latino neighborhood that has one of the highest case rates in the nation, has roughly five times the rate of Covid-19 cases as much richer and whiter Santa Monica.
…
The essential workers who risk getting sick on the job are more likely to be Latino and more likely to live in overcrowded houses and apartments without space to isolate, experts have saidthroughout the pandemic.
Their jobs — including those in warehouses, food processing plants, restaurant kitchens and factories — are likely to be lower paid, and workers are less likely to be able to take time off when they’re sick.
The large-scale use of migrant labor also leaves American workers more vulnerable to pressure from foremen and hiring managers. The Wall Street Journal reported January 5:
In a 2019 report by Barclays Research that examined data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the National Institute on Drug Abuse, the bank’s analysts said that opioid use in the U.S. has made workers in the industry less productive and has increased costs to the industry. While the precise number of overdose deaths in the North American construction industry is hard to determine, the workers are roughly six times more likely than workers in other manufacturing, industrial and service industries to become addicted to opioids, according to the report.
…
Mr. Anderson, a 28-year-old elevator mechanic who works in New York City, became addicted to Percocet and OxyContin when he started his first construction job framing houses at 19 years of age. He found that he could get more work done when he was high and unable to feel the strain of the job.
“I was doing my thing, doing my work, and life didn’t become a mess,” he said. “It was no harm, no foul.” Eventually, however, he found he couldn’t even get to work without the drugs and spent almost all his money on the pills. When those became too expensive or difficult to find, he switched to heroin.
Jordan’s New York Times article included a quote from a California academic who has seen his state transformed by commingled waves of cheap legal and illegal labor since 1990:
“The principle is simple: If you carry out a broad legalization [of illegal migrants], it doesn’t freeze undocumented migration flows as long as labor demand persists,” said Wayne Cornelius, director emeritus of the Center for Comparative Immigration Studies at the University of California, San Diego.
“That’s why you need to increase the number of legal-entry opportunities, to accommodate future migrants,” Cornelius emailed Breitbart News.
However, Cornelis declined to answer any questions about the impact of a migrant-flooded labor market on the distribution of wealth and poverty throughout California and the United States.
Many investors gain from importing a population of poor, taxpayer-aided consumers.
Biden's deputies cancel DHS office for seeing signs of anti-American discrimination by CEOs who hire 350K+ imported 'OPT' contract workers.
The main victims are US graduates, incl. Biden voters.
BTW, estb. media rushed to protect OPT cheats in 2019. #H1bhttps://t.co/6O4BKaPkM1— Neil Munro (@NeilMunroDC) January 27, 202
House Democrats Urge Joe Biden to Give Obamacare to DACA Recipients
Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-TX) and 93 other House Democrats are urging President Joe Biden to give Obamacare benefits to Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program (DACA) recipients.
Castro and the 93 other House Democrats signed a letter Tuesday pressing for the change as part of the response to the coronavirus pandemic, claiming it would benefit not only those in the DACA program, but also the general public, NBC News reported.
The letter was addressed to Biden and Acting Secretary of Health and Human Services Norris Cochran.
Castro said in the letter:
Access to Covid-19 testing and treatment for DACA recipients and their U.S. citizen children is absolutely critical during this pandemic, particularly for the 202,500 DACA recipients employed as essential workers on the front lines to keep our country healthy and running.
Under current rules, DACA recipients cannot enroll in Obamacare because they are not considered “lawfully present.” Castro argued that DACA recipients are treated as “lawfully present” for other federal benefits and urged the Biden administration to revoke the rule.
Whether House members plan to enact legislation to this effect or just want Biden to introduce an executive order on the subject is unclear.
Some Republicans say the effort will not pass Congress if Democrats try to introduce it as legislation.
“He’s doubling down on putting American taxpayers last by giving free health care to DACA recipients, when he should be solely focused on the most urgent health issue of our time: getting every American vaccinated,” Lauren Fine, a spokeswoman for Republican House Whip Steve Scalise told Fox News Friday.
“An expansion of ObamaCare to DACA recipients won’t pass Congress and is wasting time he should be spending on leading us out of the Coronavirus crisis and reopening our economy,” Fine added.
If Castro’s push is successful, the move would be another expansion of benefits the Biden administration would be providing to illegal aliens.
The DACA program, which was started in 2012 during the Obama administration, allowed illegal aliens who came to the country as young children to work or go to school while they legally remained in the country.
Former President Donald Trump repeatedly tried to end DACA, but the Supreme Court rebuffed his efforts.
EXCLUSIVE: Obscure Cartel Figure Terrorizing Mexican Border Region Revealed
The face of an obscure figure surfaced as the man leading a cartel’s attacks in one border region as they fight for drug trafficking routes and fuel theft territories. These cartel forces are linked to several attacks on police units including the murder of a police chief who supported a rival organization.
Breitbart Texas consulted with U.S. law enforcement sources who operate in Mexico to learn about a regional leader with the Cartel Del Noreste faction of Los Zetas. The faction leader is known as “El Amarillo” or “The Yellow One.” While details of the man’s identity remain a mystery, authorities on both sides of the border came across his name as they continue to look into the cartel’s activities in northern Nuevo Leon.
Intelligence documents currently identify El Amarillo as the man in charge of CDN-Los Zetas convoys. The convoys travel from Nuevo Leon and enter Tamaulipas from the south to carry out attacks as part of an ongoing turf war with a faction of the Gulf Cartel.
El Amarillo’s forces are believed to be behind the attack on Francisco Leonidez Cruz, the police chief in the town of Doctor Coss. As Breitbart Texas reported, the chief died while fighting off an ambush from cartel armored vehicles. Law enforcement sources indicate Leonidez Cruz supported the Gulf Cartel prior to his assassination.
The CDN-Los Zetas cells on the ground receive their orders from El Amarillo. He also oversees their supply of weapons, vehicles, and tactical gear. While El Amarillo is in charge of defending newly gained territories, authorities did not confirm if he is linked to the discoveries of mutilated bodies with cartel messages discovered in border towns.
The unmasking of El Amarillo comes just weeks after Breitbart Texas unmasked Ricardo “Ricky” Chapa who has been leading the CDN-Los Zetas forces in the northwestern border of Tamaulipas as the criminal organization pushed east in an attempt to gain control of 43 miles of the unfenced border known as la Riberena. That region, which is immediately south of Starr County, Texas, has been controlled historically by the Gulf Cartel. In recent months, CDN-Los Zetas cells began to gain a considerable amount of turf and took over some of the region’s corridors into Texas.
Gerald “Tony” Aranda is a contributing writer for Breitbart Texas.
CLARK: Joe Biden’s Immigration Plan Will Impact Communities far from Border
When we think of illegal immigration and its impact on America, opinions are sharply divided. The images invoked are “kids in cages,” large caravans, border rescues, and wild border chases between law enforcement and illegal immigrant smugglers.
The U.S. southern border is just a waypoint for migrants along a much larger journey. One that usually ends far from the deserts of Arizona, the brush country in Texas, or the beaches and mountains near San Diego.
According to the Pew Research Center, most of the undocumented immigrants within the United States live in just 20 major metropolitan areas. Ranking number one is the New York metro area which is home to 1.1 million illegal immigrants. Ranking number two is the Los Angeles metro area — home to an estimated 925,000 illegal aliens.
There is no reason to believe that future illegal immigration patterns will trend away from these select metropolitan areas considering many, including New York and Los Angeles, are sanctuary cities. What is interesting is the outward migration from these areas.
During the COVID-19 Pandemic, New York’s wealthiest residents left the city in record numbers. U.S. Census Bureau statistics indicate over 126 thousand residents left New York state between July 2019 and July 2020. Many of them seeking states with no state income tax such as Texas or Florida.
The same data shows over 135,000 residents left California. Prominent tech giants Oracle and Hewlett Packard announced the relocation of operations from California to Texas. Tesla CEO Elon Musk followed suit.
So far, President Joe Biden promised an immigration plan that will include a pathway to citizenship for over 11 million illegal immigrants currently living in the shadows. His recent executive orders ending the “remain in Mexico” program, also known as the Migrant Protection Protocols, and his executive order reducing interior enforcement of immigration laws have all but decimated the strong anti-illegal immigration measures of the Trump administration. In essence, the welcome mat has been laid out.
So far, the new president has not defined any real position on increasing border security or that it is of any relevance to him. The Immigration Reform and Control Act contained provisions to increase the size of the U.S. Border Patrol by 50 percent each year during the two years after its passage. As a deterrent to future illegal immigration, significant employer sanctions measures were put in place. This clause was largely to garner bi-partisan support in Congress.
In stark contrast, The U.S. Citizenship Act of 2021, which President Biden has presented to Congress, lacks any substantial enforcement strategy to curtail future illegal immigration once the amnesty portion is concluded.
Far from increasing efforts to deter future illegal immigration, a fact sheet on Biden’s immigration plan provided to reporters by the White House focuses more on providing pathways to relief from our current immigration laws than identifying ways to properly enforce them.
According to the fact sheet:
The bill codifies and funds the President’s $4 billion four-year inter-agency plan to address the underlying causes of migration in the region, including by increasing assistance to El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras, conditioned on their ability to reduce the endemic corruption, violence, and poverty that causes people to flee their home countries.
Rather than any increase in personnel needed to ready the Border Patrol to deal with the almost certain influx the bill will promote, the plan lays out enhancements to internal investigation capabilities and oversight.
The fact sheet continues:
The bill provides funding for training and continuing education to promote agent and officer safety and professionalism. It also creates a Border Community Stakeholder Advisory Committee, provides more special agents at the DHS Office of Professional Responsibility to investigate criminal and administrative misconduct, and requires the issuance of department-wide policies governing the use of force.
Much of what little the bill’s fact sheet does say about border security is related to narcotics smuggling at ports of entry and little if any definitive way towards enforcement between the ports of entry. As experience has taught us along the border, if the Border Patrol Agents are processing and caring for thousands of illegal immigrants, very few are patrolling the border. The references to smart technologies are moot if the Border Patrol cannot deploy an adequate response that smart technology will require.
What Biden’s plan does not do is change in any way the existing immigration laws that place people in the shadows in the first place. When all is said and done, it will still be a criminal offense to enter the United States illegally.
Much like the last attempt to provide relief to the illegal immigrant population in 2013 proposed by the “gang of eight,” Bidens plan will surely face significant opposition from certain members of Congress. It is far from a bi-partisan bill at this point.
The mere fact an amnesty plan has been proposed and the lax tenor of other executive actions related to immigration will have implications miles from the border. In states like New York and California, where tax revenues plummeted due to the exodus of wealthy residents, a new wave of illegal immigrants will pose significant financial impacts as they continue to battle COVID-19 and its effect on employment opportunities.
As many businesses look to automation to reduce labor costs and other businesses are suffering COVID-19-related closures, President Biden added tens of thousands of workers to the unemployment line by canceling permits to the Keystone Pipeline.
Biden’s intention to increase the federal minimum wage to $15 per hour poses another risk to the viability of many small businesses.
Many factors influence illegal immigration to the United States. Changes in our economy or the economies abroad, security concerns, and existing employment opportunities in the home country will play a role in future migration to the United States. Although some may disagree, any hope of amnesty in the future will likely cause a future influx as well. For those who currently reside in those major metropolitan areas that historically attract most illegal immigrants, the financial impacts may be felt for years to come.
Randy Clark is a 32-year veteran of the United States Border Patrol. Prior to his retirement, he served as the Division Chief for Law Enforcement Operations, directing operations for nine Border Patrol Stations within the Del Rio, Texas Sector.
Biden Orders the End of Construction of U.S/Mexican Border Wall
One of many Executive Orders to reverse Trump’s successful immigration policies.
President Joe Biden is opposed to nearly everything that Trump stood for. Biden’s dangerous immigration policies have been the focus of a number of my recent articles, for example,
Terror Arrest Highlights How Perilous Biden’s Immigration Plans Are and What Biden’s Immigration Policies Would Do To America.
During his run for the Presidency four years ago, Donald Trump made immigration law enforcement and border security key priorities for his campaign.
At numerous political rallies the raucous and enthusiastic attendees would frequently chant, “Build that wall!”
The need to secure that border and address the myriad other vulnerabilities was made abundantly clear by the 9/11 Commission which determined that the 9/11 terror attacks and other such attacks were only possible because of multiple failures of the immigration system.
Furthermore, large-scale human trafficking and the flood of narcotics flowing into the United States across that dangerous border added to the demand for securing it.
As I have noted many times in previous articles, the preface of the official report, 9/11 and Terrorist Travel begins with the following paragraph:
It is perhaps obvious to state that terrorists cannot plan and carry out attacks in the United States if they are unable to enter the country. Yet prior to September 11, while there were efforts to enhance border security, no agency of the U.S. government thought of border security as a tool in the counterterrorism arsenal. Indeed, even after 19 hijackers demonstrated the relative ease of obtaining a U.S. visa and gaining admission into the United States, border security still is not considered a cornerstone of national security policy. We believe, for reasons we discuss in the following pages, that it must be made one.
Let me be clear, the border wall, by itself, will not end the immigration crisis. It is, however, an important element of what should be an integrated system. I have come to compare the border wall with a wing on an airplane. Without its wings and airplane will not fly, however, a wing by itself goes nowhere.
Opponents of the wall sometimes refer to it as a “Wall of Hate” allegedly designed to keep Mexicans out of the United States. This is, of course a bald-faced lie. Every day the Border Patrol encounters illegal aliens seeking to enter the U.S. by evading the inspections process conducted at ports of entry to prevent the entry of aliens whose presence in the U.S. would threaten public health, public safety, national security and the jobs and wages of Americans.
A review of a section of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S. Code § 1182 - Inadmissible aliens will quickly dispel the lies about the nature of our immigration laws that are utterly and totally blind as to race, religion or ethnicity.
Furthermore - and this may shock you - but the wall is not designed to keep anyone out of the United States!
The wall does not block our ports of entry. The wall is simply intended to make certain that all people and all commerce seeking entry into the U.S. are funneled through ports of entry so that they can be vetted in an orderly process and a record of entry is created. To this point I also compare the border wall with the velvet rope at the bank that guides customers to the next available teller; or to the “cattle runs” at airports that guide lines of passengers to the inspections process conducted by the TSA to keep weapons and dangerous individuals off of airplanes.
This gives rise to an interesting question: do you know anyone who would get onboard an airliner if he/she saw fellow passengers evading the TSA inspections process? Why then is it reasonable for Americans and lawful immigrants to be forced to live among millions of illegal aliens who evaded a very similar inspections process conducted by CBP (Customs and Border Protection) at ports of entry for a very similar purpose?
Although the need to construct a secure border was clear to everyone, nothing of consequence was ever done to actually build a physical wall even after the terror attacks of 9/11.
Members of Congress said that we needed to find a “modern” and high-tech way of securing the border. This gave rise to various high-tech proposals such as SBInet (Secure Border Initiative Network).
Many of these supposed high-tech “solutions” came to be referred as a “Virtual Fence.”
SBINet was ultimately abandoned after an expenditure of roughly one billion dollars that was reported on Washington Technology website in the January 14, 2011 article, Boeing's SBInet contract gets the axe that included a link to the DHS report, Report On The Assessment Of The Secure Border Initiative-Network (SBInet) Program.
Donald Trump, the builder, came along and promised that he would build a wall. A real wall! I addressed this in an article several years ago, Why Trump’s Wall Is A Must (And why a “virtual fence” will stop no one.)
Even with Republicans controlling both the Senate and House of Representatives during Trump’s first two years, the money was never appropriated to construct the vital wall. Lawsuits were filed to block the wall and President Trump decided to use money allocated to the military to secure the border and finally he succeeded.
On July 26, 2019 The Hill reported, Supreme Court rules Trump can use military funds for border wall construction.
The bigger issue is why on earth would anyone be opposed to protecting America and Americans from the influx of huge numbers of illegal aliens whose backgrounds, identities, possible affiliations with criminal or terrorist organizations cannot be determined? Why would anyone act to prevent the flood of dangerous narcotics into the United States - unless, perhaps, they were profiting from these deadly criminal enterprises of human trafficking and drug smuggling?
Trump’s tactic makes perfect sense. The primary shared mission of the U.S. military is to keep America’s enemies as far from our shores as possible. However, “up close and in person” that vital mission falls to the Border Patrol and ICE (Immigration and Customs enforcement).
Arrests along the border dropped as the wall’s construction began. The wall certainly helped to deter illegal immigration, but so did the policies of the Trump administration that included the “Remain in Mexico Program” for political asylum applicants as was reported by NPR on March 11, 2020, U.S. Supreme Court Allows 'Remain In Mexico' Program To Continue.
What a difference a day or, an election makes! Ever since Joe Biden appeared to have won the elections we have seen massive caravans of thousands of foreign nationals forming up in Central America, heading to the United States.
Biden promised a 100 day moratorium in the deportation of illegal aliens - although that Executive Order was put on hold temporarily, on January 26, 2021. The Blaze reported, Federal judge blocks Biden's deportation pause for two weeks, Biden’s message is clear, any aliens who enter the U.S. by any means will not face consequences and will likely be granted lawful status via Biden’s legislative initiative to create a dangerous massive amnesty program.
These issues all fly in the face of not only the 9/11 Commission but the findings and recommendations of many experts who have testified before numerous House and Senate hearings.
I wrote about one such hearing in my article:
World-Wide Threat Assessment Makes Powerful Case For Border Security
I have testified before more than 15 such hearings and have often said I wish that they had “listenings” instead of “hearings!”
On April 17, 2018 the House Committee on Homeland Security, Counterterrorism and Intelligence Subcommittee conducted a hearing on the topic, “State Sponsors Of Terrorism: An Examination Of Iran’s Global Terrorism Network.”
The prepared testimony of one of the witnesses, Dr. Emanuele Ottolenghi of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, included this excerpt that will serve as the final word for my commentary. I want you remember his warning the next time you see coverage of the caravans of foreign nationals heading to the United States or when you hear the leaders of Iran threaten action against the United States:
In recent years, Hezbollah’s Latin American networks have also increasingly cooperated with violent drug cartels and criminal syndicates, often with the assistance of local corrupt political elites. Cooperation includes laundering of drug money; arranging multi-ton shipments of cocaine to the United States and Europe; and directly distributing and selling illicit substances to distant markets. Proceeds from these activities finance Hezbollah’s arms procurement; its terror activities overseas; its hold on Lebanon’s political system; and its efforts, both in Lebanon and overseas, to keep Shi’a communities loyal to its cause and complicit in its endeavors.
This toxic crime-terror nexus is fueling both the rising threat of global jihadism and the collapse of law and order across Latin America that is helping drive drugs and people northward into the United States. It is sustaining Hezbollah’s growing financial needs. It is helping Iran and Hezbollah consolidate a local constituency in multiple countries across Latin America. It is thus facilitating their efforts to build safe havens for terrorists and a continent-wide terror infrastructure that they could use to strike U.S. targets.
HAVE YOU EVER HEARD FROM THIS BRIBES SUCKER'S MOUTH A SINGLE WORD ABOUT REBUILDING THE AMERICAN MIDDLE CLASS DEVASTED BY OBAMANOMICS FOR BANKSTERS AND THE RICH OR AS RESULTING FROMM MEXICO'S INVASION, OCCUPATION AND LOOTING BY INVITATION OF THE GLOBALIST DEMOCRAT PARTY????
Red State AGs Warn Biden They Will Sue Administration over Changes to Immigration Rules
Six red-state attorneys general are warning the Biden administration they will take legal action if he oversteps his authority to implement radical and wide-ranging agendas, including the rollback of immigration rules.
The six attorneys general, Patrick Morrisey (WV), Ken Paxton (TX), Austin Knudsen (MT), Lynn Fitch (MS), Todd Rokita (IN), and Leslie Rutledge (AR) signed the letter addressed to President Joe Biden, highlighting concerns over the tone he has set in his early days in office by signing a flurry of executive actions, besting the pace of all his predecessors.
The officials noted that Biden’s first week “appears to indicate” that his administration “may be following the unfortunate path of executive unilateralism” and warned that they will take action in the event of “cabinet officials, executive officers, and agencies” moving beyond their authority. The Republicans listed specific issues that may arise — from the administration attempting to implement the “extreme ‘Green New Deal'” agenda to “tearing down immigration statutes” via “executive fiat.”
“Overreaching and defying Congress will not be rewarded or succeed. Our States have led the charge in successfully challenging unauthorized and unlawful executive actions, as you know from your years as Vice President,” they warned. “You can be assured that we will do so again, if necessary”:
Whether it be directing a wide swath of federal agencies to exceed their limited statutory mandates to implement the extreme ‘Green New Deal’ agenda that Congress has not enacted, making transformative changes to our healthcare system that were specifically rejected in passing the Affordable Care Act, strong-arming businesses into changing practices to adhere to unreasonable and twisted interpretations of long-extant statutes, having the Department of the Treasury and the Federal Reserve conjure up massive boondoggle spending sprees without congressional authorizations and appropriations, usurping the authority of the States to protect local streams, or tearing down immigration statutes passed by Congress by executive fiat, we will not hesitate to defend America against illegal executive actions.
“When Presidents do not take care to ensure that executive agencies live up to their obligation of reasoned decision making, the task often falls to us as State Attorneys General to challenge their actions in court,” they continued.
“While we would rather you keep agencies from running amok in the first place, we will not hesitate to step up to the plate when our States are harmed by agency malfeasance,” they added:
2021.01.27 Letter — Presid… by Fox News
The letter comes as Biden breaks records in terms of executive actions in the early days of his presidency. Revoking former President Donald Trump’s constitutional 2017 travel ban, thereby resuming immigration from countries known to harbor terrorists, was one of the first executive actions Biden took upon assuming office last week:
Biden signed executive actions terminating Trump’s orders declaring a national emergency on the Southern border to fund the construction of a border wall, rescinding the exclusion of non-citizens from the census, ending the “Remain in Mexico” policy for refugees, and suspending most deportations for 100 days.
Biden also released a bill to give amnesty to all illegal immigrants in the United States.
White House press secretary Jen Psaki defended Biden’s immediate focus on immigration as a broader approach to fighting for “racial equity.”
Further executive actions on immigration currently face delays, according to a Thursday report from Fox News. Even so, Democrat lawmakers are seeking to recruit Republicans to join their amnesty-driven agenda.
This week, dozens of progressive House lawmakers sent a letter to Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris, demanding future coronavirus relief measures to include recurring payments that extend to those who may be residing in the country illegally.
No comments:
Post a Comment