This lady has been here 20 years. Yes she was busted for having false documents, but this is a perfect example of someone trying to make a better life for herself and getting caught in the system. By all accounts she has never caused any problems, she was trying to comply with ICE by checking in with them, and now we have punished her, her community, her family and our reputation.
If you think it's okay to harp on her very minor crime, and say "she should have followed the rules", then you need to take a step back and look at your own bubble.
Like President Obama's executive actions on immigration, President Trump's executive order overreaches and undermines our constitutional system. It's not lawful to ban immigrants on the basis of nationality. If the president wants to change immigration law, he must work with Congress.
The president's denial of entry to lawful permanent residents of the United States (green card holders) is particularly troubling. Green card holders live in the United States as our neighbors and serve in our Armed Forces. They deserve better.
I agree with the president that we must do much more to properly vet refugees, but a blanket ban represents an extreme approach not consistent with our nation's values. While the executive order allows the admittance of immigrants, nonimmigrants, and refugees "on a case-by-case basis," arbitrariness would violate the Rule of Law.
Ultimately, the executive order appears to be more about politics than safety. If the concern is radicalism and terrorism, then what about Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and others?
Finally, we can't effectively fight homegrown Islamic radicalism by perpetuating the “us vs. them” mindset that terrorists use to recruit. We must ensure that the United States remains dedicated to the Constitution, the Rule of Law, and liberty. It can't be stated strongly enough that capitalism creates prosperity and improves assimilation into society.
Like President Obama's executive actions on immigration, President Trump's executive order overreaches and undermines our constitutional system. It's not lawful to ban immigrants on the basis of nationality. If the president wants to change immigration law, he must work with Congress.
The president's denial of entry to lawful permanent residents of the United States (green card holders) is particularly troubling. Green card holders live in the United States as our neighbors and serve in our Armed Forces. They deserve better.
I agree with the president that we must do much more to properly vet refugees, but a blanket ban represents an extreme approach not consistent with our nation's values. While the executive order allows the admittance of immigrants, nonimmigrants, and refugees "on a case-by-case basis," arbitrariness would violate the Rule of Law.
Ultimately, the executive order appears to be more about politics than safety. If the concern is radicalism and terrorism, then what about Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and others?
Finally, we can't effectively fight homegrown Islamic radicalism by perpetuating the “us vs. them” mindset that terrorists use to recruit. We must ensure that the United States remains dedicated to the Constitution, the Rule of Law, and liberty. It can't be stated strongly enough that capitalism creates prosperity and improves assimilation into society.
This week, President Donald Trump is expected to sign executive orders broadly banning refugee resettlement, and permanently targeting refugees from seven countries, including Syria.
These executive orders threaten our national security, undermine the extensive vetting procedures we have in place to screen refugees, and discount the successes and contributions of refugees in America. They negate America’s fundamental political and cultural values, and will have devastating impacts worldwide.
There are 48 foreign-born athletes on Team USA in the Summer Olympics, including one that already won a medal.
The last time Enkelejda Shehaj competed at the Olympic Games, she was representing Albania.
That was in 1996. Three years later, with the government of her home nation collapsing and fearing for her family's safety, Shehaj flew to the United States with two suitcases: "One with my clothes," she told NBC Sports. "And one luggage, it sits there in my closet with all my medals, magazines, articles that were written about me and all the diplomas and everything that had related to the sport. That's it."
Shehaj completed the complicated process to become a U.S. citizen in 2012 and this week she's back at the Olympics, competing as a member of the U.S. team in Rio de Janerio.
Her story is one of the more dramatic ones, but Shehaj is far from being the only immigrant competing for the Stars and Stripes at this year's Summer Olympics. According to research from Alex Nowrasteh, an immigration policy analyst for the Cato Institute, there are 48 members of the Team USA who were born in other countries.
OK, OK, you can stay!
Wait, they did make contra dancing an Olympic sport for Japan 2020, right?
Washington D.C. – April 26, 2016. Today, the Niskanen Center released a new paper describing the U.S. private sector’s strong tradition in supporting refugee resettlement. The paper, “Private Refugee Resettlement in U.S. History,” provides a detailed history of the successful resettlement of refugees using private funds, and calls for the urgent reinstatement of a private refugee program in the wake of the current global refugee crisis.
“The United States has demonstrated great generosity toward refugees throughout its history, with the private sector playing the leading role,” said David Bier, Niskanen Center’s director of immigration reform. “The history should inspire the federal government to create the opportunity for Americans to sponsor or fund the resettlement of refugees fleeing violence and persecution abroad.”
The concept of private refugee sponsorship has been endorsed by nine U.S.-based Syrian, Arab, and Muslim American organizations last year in a letter to the president coordinated by the Niskanen Center. “Since we launched this project, Americans from all walks of life have contacted us to describe their desire to sponsor refugees,” Mr. Bier said. “It’s time that we unleashed American philanthropy to save many more lives.”
Today marks the beginning of the Reason for Reform campaign, part of the Partnership for a New American Economy’s (NAE) advocacy efforts in favor of comprehensive immigration reform. The campaign is bringing together a coalition of different people and groups—from community leaders to businesses—to work together in every state across the country to promote much-needed reform.
Evidenced in state-by-state reports, the campaign demonstrates how important immigrants are to the economy of every state. Each report emphasizes the many different, and often overlooked, ways that immigrants are vital in their contributions. NAE released 51 reports—one for each state and the District of Columbia—detailing the size and character of those contributions.
The reports shed light on the power of the entrepreneurial energy immigrants bring to each state. The immigrant debate often overlooks that immigrants are big job creators. In fact, immigrants are more likely to start new businesses than natives.
In Washington, D.C. alone, the report finds that while 14% of the population is born abroad, 20% of D.C.’s entrepreneurs are immigrants. Job growth in D.C. is therefore driven disproportionately by its immigrant population.
Businesses owned by immigrants, the report finds, generate over $120 million in income annually. Comprehensive immigration reform should include making it easier for people to move here to start businesses or for people stay and create businesses in order to super-charge economic activity.
Earlier today, 22 Maryland state lawmakers urged Secretary of State John Kerry to launch a privately funded refugee program that would allow the American people to contribute towards increasing resettlement totals. The Niskanen Center has been leading the effort to launch such a program since last year, and applauds the Maryland lawmakers action in this crucial time.
The letter comes in the midst of an unprecedented global refugee crisis, which has left more than 21 million people in need of assistance. The United States is resettling a mere 85,000 refugees this year, but private sector contributions can provide the funding to substantially increase that number, while maintaining the rigorous security measures already in place for refugee admissions.
The U.S. must put all options on the table in order to aggressively respond to the worst humanitarian crisis since World War II. Providing the American people with a tangible outlet to support refugee resettlement helps bolster efforts to provide refuge to those fleeing war and persecution.
The letter proclaims that “American citizens, charities, foundations, faith groups, universities, and businesses should have the right to contribute towards increased refugee resettlement.” Under current law, no amount of contributions can go towards increased the refugee ceiling determined by the president. The push to reverse that policy is gaining momentum.
The legislators point to severalstatements and resolutions from the local level that “show that there is an appetite for increased engagement in the resettlement process.” The Maryland lawmakers are confident that the current system is unnecessarily putting “a ceiling on American generosity.”
There are 48 foreign-born athletes on Team USA in the Summer Olympics, including one that already won a medal.
The last time Enkelejda Shehaj competed at the Olympic Games, she was representing Albania.
That was in 1996. Three years later, with the government of her home nation collapsing and fearing for her family's safety, Shehaj flew to the United States with two suitcases: "One with my clothes," she told NBC Sports. "And one luggage, it sits there in my closet with all my medals, magazines, articles that were written about me and all the diplomas and everything that had related to the sport. That's it."
Shehaj completed the complicated process to become a U.S. citizen in 2012 and this week she's back at the Olympics, competing as a member of the U.S. team in Rio de Janerio.
Her story is one of the more dramatic ones, but Shehaj is far from being the only immigrant competing for the Stars and Stripes at this year's Summer Olympics. According to research from Alex Nowrasteh, an immigration policy analyst for the Cato Institute, there are 48 members of the Team USA who were born in other countries.
Sometimes, differential pay makes sense. Often, as you seem to imply, it is based on cost of living (i.e. paying teachers or police more in more expensive areas). If we had uniform COL throughout the world, we could eliminate locality pay adjustments, but I don't see that happening any time soon, regardless of how utopian we get.
Maybe we should work toward a society/economy that isn't based on exchange...
The whole problem of different pay and different currency has to fade. Folks doing work in India for â of the same pay as their counterpart in the states - and yet they live like kings - has to gradually equilibrate.
Sometimes, differential pay makes sense. Often, as you seem to imply, it is based on cost of living (i.e. paying teachers or police more in more expensive areas). If we had uniform COL throughout the world, we could eliminate locality pay adjustments, but I don't see that happening any time soon, regardless of how utopian we get.
Once we realize - as a species - that this whole nation-state thing is a childish holdover from our primitive past, this will no longer be an issue.
We are nowhere near evolved enough for a one world government, you of all people should be aware of this. Any attempt to do so would be quickly hijacked and morph into facism and then bloodshed on a mass scale. In short Homo Sapiens as a species is really lame and cannot be trusted with that much centralized power.
Once we realize - as a species - that this whole nation-state thing is a childish holdover from our primitive past, this will no longer be an issue.
The whole problem of different pay and different currency has to fade. Folks doing work in India for â of the same pay as their counterpart in the states - and yet they live like kings - has to gradually equilibrate.
Surprisingly optimistic for an admitted misanthrope. Do you think humans can really discard their tendency towards tribalism? Does the social bond require some sort of identification with a group that is a subset of the species? We need an anthropologist, STAT!
We either transcend our demons or we join them in hell.
Once we realize - as a species - that this whole nation-state thing is a childish holdover from our primitive past, this will no longer be an issue.
Surprisingly optimistic for an admitted misanthrope. Do you think humans can really discard their tendency towards tribalism? Does the social bond require some sort of identification with a group that is a subset of the species? We need an anthropologist, STAT!
Deciding not to reproduce gave us a lot of extra resources to improve our quality of life. Kids are expensive, be sure you a) understand that, and b) understand why you want them and if it is really worth it.
University Education is one of the few things produced in Oz anymore. It is a bit easier for students to stay here than in the US. It makes economic sense to make it easier for them to stay. I don't think starting a business should be the only metric for talent and productivity though.
When I want to jerk people's chain, I tell them that we should de-incentivize having children and just import them when they have finished secondary school.
reproducing is under the umbrella of basic human rights and i can see where implying that people shouldn't could lead to some conflict
seriously if we want to curb the population and possibly decrease it we should improve the quality of life (more and/or better products/production)
