Posted on an earlier thread:
Lack of principles? Placing a temporary moratorium on Muslim immigration until we figure out what’s going on would indeed be a highly principled commonsense act, but I don’t think this was ever part of Trump’s original plan. And it was no part of anyone’s plan. If I remember correctly, Trump just kind of threw it out there during a campaign rally a day or two after the San Bernardino Muslim terrorist attack. It caught in like wildfire amongst his supporters, but the entire ruling class (other than possibly Jeff Sessions) and all fellow candidates and “conservative” pundits immediately pooh-pooed the idea as being unconstitutional.
We’ll see. I hope he gets it done, but it would be a Herculean task.
This is not the hill to die on.
Well said.
He needs to change it to a ban on all immigration, as was done for forty years, until a certain criteria has been met. That criteria should consist of:
- the national debt being significantly reduced
- the REAL unemployment rate reaching an acceptable level
- the current crop of legal immigrants must be satisfactorily assimilated
- the illegals in the country must be summarily dealt with
- a very thorough and highly secure screening process for any new, legal immigration must be in place
If he halts all immigration, nobody can scream discrimination - there is no real way of screening out muslims....they have been known to avoid telling the truth.
What you said...
+1,000
I don’t understand how something can be ‘unconstitutional’ when it doesn’t affect citizens...?
-JT
I think the hill to stand on “if not die” would be an insistence that we have or can devise a means of veting refugees or other immigrants before admitting them. Clearly we can’t vet Syrian origin refugees at present. I believe that was part of Trump’s position and I know it was Cruz’s.
I would add Libyan and Somali because of the crisis and instability there.
Foreign refugees located external to the US have no Constitutional rights no matter what the beautiful people may say.