Hispanic activists’ anti-Trump efforts fall flat as citizenship push sputters

Immigrant-rights advocates had vowed to make 2016 the year of the anti-Donald Trump citizenship surge, hoping to sign up a million new immigrants eager to send a message rejeting the GOP’s presidential candidate — but so far they’re falling short, with naturalization rates only slightly higher than four years ago.

There’s little question that Mr. Trump’s outsized rhetoric has angered Hispanic activists overall, and Mexican immigrants in particular. But applications for citizenship are up just 6.6 percent compared to the same period in 2012, according to the latest data from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, and actual approvals are down slightly.

Groups say the numbers don’t jibe with the intensity they’re detecting when they hold citizenship workshops, and they’re hoping when all is said and done, the numbers will be higher.

“I certainly don’t have a crystal ball but what we’ve seen on the ground is that there’s strong anecdotal evidence that suggests people are turning out in bigger numbers this year,” said Tara Raghuveer, deputy director at the National Partnership for New Americans, which is leading a push for naturalizations.

“We saw unprecedented turnout at our events across the country We feel that the effect of the political climate is real and will have real effects on the naturalization numbers,” she said.

from an email:

A 1952 Law

Wouldn’t it be interesting if at some point during his campaigning Donald Trump said “oh by the way....”

McCARRAN-WALTER ACT OF 1952

Here’s a historic fact that would seem to indicate that many, if not most, of

the people we elect to go to Washington don’t have the slightest idea of

what laws already exist. I did not know of this until now. It’s been law for

over 60 years.

Trump was recently severely criticized for suggesting that the U.S.

should limit or temporarily suspend the immigration of certain ethnic

groups, nationalities, and even people of certain religions (Muslims).

The criticisms condemned such a suggestion as, among other things,

being Un-American, dumb, stupid, reckless, dangerous and racist.

Congressmen and Senators swore that they would never allow such

legislation, and the president called such a prohibition on immigration unconstitutional.

As Gomer Pyle would say, Surprise, Surprise, Surprise!” It seems that the

selective immigration ban is already law and has been applied on several

occasions. Known as the McCarran-Walter Act, the Immigration and

Nationality Act of 1952 allows for the “Suspension of entry or imposition

of restrictions by president. Whenever the president finds that the entry

of aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental

to the interests of the United States, the president may, by proclamation, and

for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or

any class of aliens as immigrants or non-immigrants or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.

The act was utilized by Jimmy Carter, no less, in 1979 to keep Iranians out

of the United States, but he actually did more. He made all Iranian students

already here check in, and then he deported a bunch. Seven thousand were

found in violation of their visas, 15,000 Iranians were forced to leave the

United States in 1979.

It is of note that the act requires that an applicant for immigration must be of

good moral character and “attached to the principles of the Constitution.

Since the Quran forbids Muslims to swear allegiance to the U.S. Constitution, technically, all Muslims should be refused immigration.

Authenticated at: http://library.uwb.edu/static/USimmigration/1952_immigration_and_nationality_act.html

I suggest Donald make an even stronger response to the Latino conspiracies against him. Trump needs to run w/ this.

A provision in the Export Administration Regulations (EAR)is intended to prevent United States citizens and companies being used as instrumentalities of a foreign government's foreign policy.

===============================================

CASE IN POINT The Hispanic Bar Association is advocating an economic boycott of Trump companies...in order to stop Trump

Of course, being Hispanic, these people have no knowledge of US law. But this action places the latino lawyers and their organization in serious legal jeopardy.

NOTE WELL The Hispanic lawyers' boycott is clearly intended as an expression of protest for purely political reasons.......involving the interests of the foreign country of Mexico to which they swear allegiance .

In the United States, the anti-boycott provisions of the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) apply to all "U.S. persons" (defined to include individuals and companies located in the United States and their foreign affiliates).

The antiboycott provisions are intended to prevent United States citizens and companies being used as instrumentalities of a foreign government's foreign policy.

These persons are subject to the law when their activities relate to the sale, purchase, or transfer of goods or services (including the sale of information) within the United States or between the United States and a foreign country.

This covers exports and imports, financing, forwarding and shipping, and certain other transactions that may take place wholly offshore.....AND/OR ACROSS THE BORDER.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.