I essentially agree with your analysis of it, I am just saying that the claim no religious litmus test has ever existed is bogus based on a clear reading of the laws on the books and paying attention to past history. If someone claims that they are being persecuted based on their religion, then you have to verify they are of said religion and determine if the request for refugee status is legitimate (ultimately a religious litmus test). At least you would have to do this if you are legitimately performing the job function described in the codified law.
Ok, so now you see what I mean. This law does not say we can impose a religious test to determine if someone is a refugee (i.e. This law does not enable us to say You’re a muslim, sorry!”). This law only says “You can be a refugee if you’re being persecuted for (race, religion, nationality etc...).
So now that we have established that the law cited in the NRO article does not allow us to impose a religious test...you said:
“...the claim that no religious litmus test has ever existed is bogus based on a clear reading of the laws on the books”
Which law? If you know of a law that allows us to impose the test you’re talking about, please cite it because we’re going to need it!
I’m on your side here, I do NOT want any part of these refugees being here as I think it’s suicidal. That’s what the author of that NRO piece tried to do and he’s on our side too but, as we determined, he misread it.